Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Baseline Environmental Conditions The methods used to collect and
Document related concepts
Island restoration wikipedia , lookup
Restoration ecology wikipedia , lookup
Biodiversity action plan wikipedia , lookup
Source–sink dynamics wikipedia , lookup
Wildlife crossing wikipedia , lookup
Habitat Conservation Plan wikipedia , lookup
Human impact on the environment wikipedia , lookup
Wildlife corridor wikipedia , lookup
Reconciliation ecology wikipedia , lookup
Habitat destruction wikipedia , lookup
Mission blue butterfly habitat conservation wikipedia , lookup
Habitat conservation wikipedia , lookup
Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 685 - Cloudworks October 2011 Baseline Environmental Conditions The methods used to collect and analyze baseline information regarding terrestrial wildlife, wildlife habitat, and vegetation for all Three Proposed Projects are described in Section 3.0 of the Keystone EA in Appendix K. The results of baseline studies for the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project are summarized below. A complete description of baseline conditions is provided in the Keystone EA in Appendix K, in particular Section 4.4 and Section 1.4 of Appendix 1 of that report. Ecosystem Composition of Project Area The ecosystem composition and distribution of forest structural stages in the Big Silver Creek study area are shown in Figure 15-9 and 15-10. The Project area is primarily composed of site series HM (2,687 ha) and FF (1,095 ha) and structural stages 5 (1,858 ha) and 4 (1,958 ha). Site series HM and FF are capable as living habitat for western toad and as nesting habitat for Spotted Owl, Northern Goshawk, and Western Screech-owl in old forest stages. These habitats may also provide cover for grizzly bear, nesting habitat for Band-tailed Pigeon, and living habitat for tailed frogs when adjacent to suitable creeks. 577000 578000 579000 580000 581000 582000 AD 583000 HQ HM AD HQ AD AD HM 584000 RI HM HM 5508000 HM FF HM RD HM HM HQ FF HM 5507000 FF HM Legend HM HM Intake HM HM HM HM FF HM AM AM HM FF FF HM HM Big Silver Creek- Big Waterpower Map 4.4.1.a Silver Project Ecosystem Composition Ecosystem Composition AM HM HM AV 588000 HM HM HM HMFF HM AV FF AV HM AV HM 587000 HQ HM HM 586000 HM HM HQ FF AD PD 585000 DF HM HM 5509000 576000 5508000 575000 Powerhouse 5507000 574000 5509000 573000 Transmission Line Route HM HM 5506000 HM HM Penstock FF FF HM HM FF HM DF RO HM TA HM HM FF FF AM HM RD UR HM HQ HM DF Local Study Area Boundary 5505000 5505000 Potential Temporary Borrow/Laydown Area RD HM DF Headpond HM HM RS Penstock Tunnel 5506000 HM Road - Gravel AM HM River - Definite DF HM Large Rivers/Lakes HM TA HQ TA DF HM HM FF HM FF DF 5503000 HM HM HM TA TA HM HMHM AM HQ 5502000 HQ HM FF FF FFHM HM HM FF FF HQ HM HM HM AM FF HM FF HM FF FF HM FF HQ HM ES AM HM HM DF HM RS HM FF RD FF HQ AM HM FF HM 5498000 HM RD RS LA DF HM FF Kent Harrison Hot Springs Chilliwack 1 2 3 HQ HM FF 574000 HQ HQ Kilometres Scale 1:50,000 Projection: UTM NAD83 Zone 10 HM DF UR DF 573000 SS RS RS HM DF DF HM RS HM 575000 5497000 HM 0 HM HM HM Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Mission AM DF HM RI RS HQ HM DF 5498000 HQ HM HQ 5499000 HM HM HQ Hope FF DF HM HQ HM AM HM HQ FF HM DF FF ake k HM RI HQ e re HM rC RS FF FF L on ris AM ar AO FF HQ FF HM lve Si FF HQ HM HM HM FF DK HM HQ H HM Headpond Study Area g Bi HQ RS Note: See Appendix 1 for explanation of ecosystem codes ex. HQ, FF 5500000 AM AO HM RS FF FF HQ FF HQ HM FF HM FF FF FF FF HM HM Figure 15-E 15-9 Figure 5501000 FF 7 FF FF FF FF 6 FF FF HM 5501000 HQ HM HM 5500000 4;5 DF 5502000 HM Structural Stage - TEM 1-3 HQ HM 5499000 HQ FF AM HM RI 5497000 5504000 DF RD 5503000 5504000 TA DFTA FF 576000 577000 578000 579000 580000 581000 582000 583000 584000 585000 586000 587000 588000 Produced for: Cloudworks Energy Inc. Produced by: Keystone Wildlife Research Date: July 18, 2011 566000 567000 568000 569000 570000 571000 572000 573000 574000 575000 576000 577000 578000 579000 580000 581000 GB BE DK HM HQ RS FF FF HM DF 5505000 FF HM DK HM HM HM FF FF FF FF RS HQ HQ RS FF FF FF HQ FF FF HQ HM HM FF HM HM 5504000 - Big Silver Big Map Silver 4.4.1.b Creek Waterpower Project Transmission Ecosystem Transmission Line Line Ecosystem Composition Composition FF 5505000 HM 5506000 HM HM DF HM FF FF FF Legend Intake Powerhouse DF FF FF FF FF HQ FF FF DF HM DF DF DF HM FF HM FFHM FF HM HQ Transmission Line Route 5504000 5506000 HM FF DF DF Penstock Local Study Area Boundary HM HM HQHQ HM TA DF SS DF 5502000 DF DF FF FF DF FF FFHM HQ HQ HM HM FF HQ RD HQ FF Large Rivers/Lakes HM HM HMHM FF AM HM HM HQ River - Definite Structural Stage - TEM 5502000 HQ DF HQ HM HM FF HM 1-3 4;5 FF HQ FF AM OF HM HM HM FF FF HQ Ha rr FF HM RS HM HM FF HQ RS HM HM HQ HM 5500000 HM FF HM HM 5501000 HQ FF HM HM HM HQ HQ HQ HM HM HM is on La ke AM AO 7 HM AM RS DF FF 6 HQ AO FF HM HM HM HM 5501000 HM 5503000 FF HQ 5500000 5503000 Road - Gravel HM AM AM Figure 15-10 Figure 15-F AM TA HQ LA HQ DF HM HQ HM HQ HM HM HQ 5499000 5499000 HQ HQ DF DF AM FF FF HQ Note: See Appendix 1 for explanation of ecosystem codes ex. HQ, FF HM FF Study Area DF HM DF HM HQ e Lak on RS HM HM RS s rri SS RS 5498000 HM HM Ha 5498000 HM FF DF 5497000 DF DF 5497000 HM DF HM FF HM HM HM RS DF HM FF HM HM HM FF HQ HM HM HM RS 5495000 HM RS 567000 568000 569000 570000 571000 572000 573000 574000 575000 RS FF 576000 Chilliwack 1 2 3 Scale 1:50,000 HQ FF RS 0 Kent Harrison Hot Springs Kilometres HM RS 566000 5496000 HM HM 5495000 5496000 Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Mission HM Hope FF 577000 578000 579000 580000 581000 Projection: UTM NAD83 Zone 10 Produced for: Cloudworks Energy Inc. Produced by: Keystone Wildlife Research Date: March 11, 2011 Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 688 - Cloudworks October 2011 Wildlife Habitat Suitability Mapping for Project Area The intake, penstock, powerhouse, headpond, and transmission line will directly affect 128 ha within the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project area. That area includes the following buffers: Intake: 25 m either side, 50 m upstream Penstock: 25 m either side Powerhouse: 25 m either side, 50 m downstream Roads (if not adjacent to powerline or penstock) 6 m Transmission: 15 m either side. The Big Silver Creek powerhouse is located within young subhydric forest, while the intake location comprises currently young mesic forest. The habitat present along the Big Silver penstock route is mostly young forest. Wildlife habitat assessments for the seasonal life requisites for selected VECs were completed at ground inspection form (GIF) plots in the Project area. In total, 99 GIF plots were completed in the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project area, and WHA assessments were completed for 80 of those plots. In 78 to 80 of the WHA plots, assessments were completed for red-legged frog, Northern Goshawk, Western Screech-owl, grizzly bear, and Columbian black-tailed deer. In 34 to 59 of the plots, ratings were completed for western toad, Bald Eagle, Band-tailed Pigeon, and Spotted Owl. The majority of the plots were in structural stage 5 and in FF (03) and RS (05) site series. Habitat suitability mapping for the Big Silver Creek study area is described in detail in Section 4.4.1 and in Section 1.4 of Appendix 1 of the Keystone EA in Appendix K. Potential environmental effects may occur where the Project footprints overlap suitable habitat. Habitat suitability of these areas is summarized below. Pond-breeding Amphibian Habitat Suitability The Big Silver Creek transmission line overlaps with less than 1 ha of Moderate-rated habitat and less than 1 ha of Low-rated habitat. The rest of the facilities are located on habitat rated Nil. There is at least one wetland within 100 m of existing roads along the proposed powerline route on the west side of Harrison Lake. Northern Goshawk Habitat Suitability The Big Silver Creek transmission line overlaps 7.5 ha of High-rated habitat. The penstock, powerhouse, intake, headpond, and transmission line overlap 44 ha of Moderate-rated habitat. The remaining facilities are in habitat rated Low and Nil. Previous timber harvest around Harrison Lake has reduced the amount of low elevation, old-growth forest in the area. However, there are multiple polygons of High-rated habitat on the west side of Harrison Lake along the transmission line. These areas are already fragmented by existing access roads and the transmission line will be located adjacent to the road. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 689 - Cloudworks October 2011 Western Screech-owl Habitat Suitability Project facilities overlap 33 ha of habitat rated Low. The rest of the facilities are located in habitat rated Nil. Previous timber harvest has reduced the amount of low elevation, old-growth riparian forest in the Big Silver area. Spotted Owl Habitat Suitability The transmission line will cross 9 ha of High-rated habitat and 4 ha of Moderate-rated habitat. The rest of the facilities are in habitat rated Low and Nil. Previous timber harvesting has reduced the amount of low elevation, old-growth forest in the area. Little to no nesting habitat is available in the Big Silver study area, and Spotted Owls have not been detected in the area for many years. Grizzly Bear Habitat Suitability Habitat suitability for grizzly bear was rated up to Class 1 (High) for spring feeding habitat in the study area. Spring The Big Silver transmission line overlaps with less than 1 ha of Class 2 (Moderately High) habitat and less than 1 ha of Class 3 (Moderate) spring feeding habitat. All other facility footprints are located in habitat rated Very Low to Nil. Summer The transmission line will intersect 3 ha of Class 3 (Moderate) summer habitat. The transmission line, powerhouse, and penstock footprints will occupy 21 ha of Class 4 (Low) habitat. All other facilities cross summer habitat that is rated Very Low to Nil. Fall The intake, headpond, and transmission line overlap with 3 ha of Class 1 (High) fall feeding habitat. The transmission line will overlap with 2 ha of Class 3 (Moderate) habitat. The powerhouse, penstock, headpond, and transmission line will overlap with 23 ha of Class 4 (Moderately Low) habitat. The remaining area of the footprints occurs in habitat rated Class 5-6 (Very Low to Nil). Rare Ecological Communities The transmission line will overlap 5 ha of High-rated habitat and 25 ha of Moderate-rated habitat for rare ecological communities. The rest of the facilities are sited in habitat rated Low or Nil. Timber harvest and recreation in this valley has reduced the potential for rare ecological communities in this area. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 690 - Cloudworks October 2011 Rare Plant Species and Habitats Rare plant surveys were completed in two days in September, totalling 15.5 search hours. For the proposed transmission line, a 12.5 km stretch was surveyed on the west side of Harrison Lake and a 3.5 km stretch on the east side. In addition, a linear distance of 2.5 km was surveyed in the area of the proposed powerhouse and penstock sites. Surveys were divided between the east and west sides of Harrison Lake. All areas surveyed were within the CWHds1 variant, as the CWHms1 areas occurred only in a few inaccessible patches within the Project area. Habitat features sampled included lakeshore beaches, slot canyons (waterfall spray zones), conifer forest of varying degrees of canopy closure, a wetland, stream margins, rocky cliffs and slopes, and human-disturbed sites. In total, 221 taxa were recorded in the area, consisting of 37 lichens, 3 liverworts, 30 mosses, and 151 vascular plants. Of these, 28 are exotic, 150 are Yellow-listed, 2 are Red-listed, 1 is new to science, and 40 have no ranking (see Table 1.4l in Appendix 1 of the Keystone EA in Appendix K of this Application). The BC status of one vascular plant is unknown as it is potentially new to science and should be treated as sensitive and rare until its taxonomy is resolved. The non-ranked taxa are all liverworts and lichens. Special Plants Twenty plants of Rorippa sp. unknown were found scattered on a lakeshore beach 60 m away from the proposed transmission line corridor on the west side of Harrison Lake. An additional population was discovered in the Tretheway Creek Waterpower Project area on alluvial outwash at the mouth of Tretheway Creek. In the same lakeshore beach habitat, a germinant of the Red-listed species Berula erecta was found. This is a previously unknown population and constitutes the second recorded population in the Chilliwack Forest District (BC CDC 2008). The moss Fontinalis hypnoides was found stranded in a muddy depression on this lakeshore beach habitat. Fontinalis may grow attached to rocks, logs, or soil, or can detach and continue to grow as a floating aquatic. It is one of our largest mosses, sometimes growing to lengths of sixty centimetres (Lawton 1971). Other populations of F. hypnoides in British Columbia have been recorded in the Peace Lowlands, the Nicola Valley, the Slocan Valley, and at Agassiz and Harrison Hot Springs. Some of those populations have been eliminated by development, and others are very old records that have not been relocated. Previous disturbance by timber harvest, powerline construction, and the access roads that accompany them have eliminated or degraded the quality of rare plant habitats that may have been present in the past. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 691 - Cloudworks October 2011 Non-native Species and Disturbed Areas The habitats along the proposed transmission line on the west side of the lake are mostly disturbed by logging, an existing transmission line, and long-term intensive recreational use. Much of the area has been clearcut, with some portions now in young regenerating forest. The overall plant and lichen diversity was low and 13% of the species encountered were non-native (see Table 4.4.2b in the Keystone EA in Appendix K of this Application). The vegetation of the cleared strip under the existing transmission line is very poor habitat for rare plants, owing to the frequent brushing of trees and large shrubs. The transmission line corridor is vegetated mostly with dense stands of shrubby plants, tree seedlings, and pioneer species of grasses and forbs, some of them invasive exotic species. Generalist Habitats A small number of vascular plant species are extremely abundant and widespread in the understorey of the CWH coniferous forests that cover the Project area. These species are tolerant of the dense shade and acidic soils below closed or semi-closed coniferous canopies. The rock types of the area are acidic and nutrient-poor, and therefore exclude a large portion of potential rare species, especially those that depend on higher pH or higher concentrations of macronutrients. The riparian forest margins are infrequently flooded and consist of shrub thickets dominated by Alnus, Rubus, Salix, Populus, and Oplopanax, with an understorey of Claytonia sibirica, Dryopteris spp., Elymus glaucus, Maianthemum dilatatum and Cornus canadensis. Few rare plant species are ever found in addition to the basic coniferous forest understorey flora, and few species are able to compete with this hyperdominant vegetation. Likewise, lichen diversity in the CWH coniferous forests is low. Mosses and liverworts tend to dominate the available substrates. Specialist Habitats Non-forested Freshwater Wetlands The non-forested freshwater wetlands in the Project area were few, but are home to a large number of plants found exclusively in these habitats. There are a number of different wetland habitat types, each with a specific ecology that favours specialist plant communities. A small marsh wetland on the west side of Harrison Lake was surveyed. The habitat quality of this marsh has been marginalized by its close proximity to the road that parallels the lake and an existing transmission line. A small population of the recently de-listed plant Hypericum majus was found at this site. No other rare species were found in the non-forested freshwater wetlands surveyed in the Project area. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 692 - Cloudworks October 2011 Lacustrine Beaches One beach in the Project area was a mosaic of sandy and cobbly areas, patches of graminoid vegetation, and muddy areas that are periodically flooded, with driftwood strewn among them. This type of habitat „patchiness‟ creates an assortment of microhabitats for rare plants. These beaches are usually sparsely vegetated and are generally home to a wide variety of vascular plant species, where no species truly dominate. Twenty plants of Rorippa sp. nov. were found scattered along the beach, and the Red-listed species Berula erecta and Fontinalis hypnoides were found growing in the muddy area of the beach with sedges. Waterfall Spray Zones Slot canyons with waterfall spray zones were encountered and surveyed on the transmission line route on the west of Harrison Lake. However, no rare species were encountered. Rare Ecological Communities Twelve rare ecological communities could potentially occur in the CWHds1 variant in the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project area (see Table 1.4e in Appendix 1 of the Keystone EA in Appendix K of this Application), but none were found during the field program. The Big Silver Creek study area contains 298 ha of High suitability habitat, and 1,438 ha of Moderate suitability habitat, with the remainder rated Low and Nil. Wildlife Surveys Wildlife surveys were completed between May and August of 2007, between May and October of 2008, and in May and August of 2010. VECs recorded within the Project area include Northern Goshawk, Bald Eagle, Olive-sided Flycatcher, American Dipper, and Pacific tailed frog. A Great Blue Heron was detected outside of the Project area near the mouth of Big Silver Creek and Harlequin Duck was detected outside the Project area. Spotted Owl surveys were not conducted due to a lack of suitable breeding habitat within areas that would be disturbed. Detailed wildlife survey results are provided in Section 1.4 of Appendix 1 of the Keystone EA in Appendix K of this Application. Songbird Survey Six point-count bird survey stations were completed along the facilities alignment on May 29, 2007. An additional 22 point-count survey stations were completed in the area of the proposed penstock on June 13, 2007, and 23 point-count stations were completed in the proposed transmission line area on June 14, 2007. In total, 212 individuals of 36 species were detected during the songbird surveys. Bird species documented represent those that would normally be expected to be present in coastal forest habitats. Along the transmission line route on the west side of the lake, 34 point-count stations were completed in the Project area on June 11, 2008. In total, 278 individuals of 38 species were detected during the breeding bird survey. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 693 - Cloudworks October 2011 Bird species detected while completing other work (e.g., field-truthing) were recorded as incidental observations. One Olive-sided Flycatcher was observed, a species listed as Threatened by COSEWIC in November 2007. One Bald Eagle was recorded during the survey. Northern Goshawk Surveys Goshawk surveys were completed on June 13 and August 13, 2007 along the facilities alignment. No goshawks were detected during surveys, and no other raptors were seen or heard. Goshawk surveys were completed along the transmission line on the west side of Harrison Lake on June 11 and July 17, 2008. One adult male Northern Goshawk was observed on June 11. Additional survey time was spent in the area where the goshawk was initially detected, but no goshawks were detected during the second survey; however, high suitability goshawk breeding habitat was identified in the area of the goshawk detection. One other raptor, a Red-tailed Hawk, was observed during the second survey. Western Screech-owl Surveys Western Screech-owl surveys were completed in the Project area on the nights of May 29/30, August 13/14, and August 26/27, 2007. No owl species were detected. Harlequin Duck Surveys Helicopter surveys for Harlequin Duck were conducted along the Big Silver Creek main stem to determine pair status on May 10, 2007 and brood status on August 2, 2007. There were no bird observations during the May 10 pair survey and no Harlequin Ducks were observed during either survey. A number of bird species were seen during the brood survey, including 3 American Dippers, 4 Common Mergansers, 1 Great Blue Heron, 1 Mallard, 1 Red-tailed Hawk, 13 Spotted Sandpipers, and undetermined species of hawk, duck, and passerines. A second pair survey was conducted on May 9, 2008 in conjunction with Harlequin Duck surveys along Shovel Creek. Several species were detected, including American Dippers, Buffleheads, and one Redtailed Hawk. A brood survey was not completed in 2008 due to poor weather conditions. One female Harlequin Duck was observed along Big Silver Creek; however, this observation occurred outside of the Project area (approximately 2 km northwest of Shovel Creek). Pair and brood surveys were performed again on Big Silver Creek in 2010. On May 14, a pair survey recorded 5 American Dippers and 1 Common Merganser south of the Project area along Big Silver Creek, and 1 Harlequin Duck north of the Project area along Big Silver Creek. A brood survey on August 5 found 1 Great Blue Heron and 14 Spotted Sandpipers along Big Silver Creek within the study area, and an additional 1 American Dipper, 1 Belted Kingfisher, 10 Common Mergansers, and 11 Spotted Sandpipers south of the Project area along Big Silver Creek. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 694 - Cloudworks October 2011 Raptor/Heron Nest Surveys Aerial nest searches were conducted the same days as the Harlequin Duck surveys on May 10, 2007, August 2, 2007, and May 9, 2008. An aerial survey also occurred before leaf-out on March 10, 2009; however, no raptors, sign of raptors, or nests were observed along Big Silver Creek. Ground surveys were conducted in conjunction with other field programs. No eagle, hawk, or heron nests or sign were observed during summer field surveys. Pond-breeding Amphibian Surveys Two polygons were identified as potential amphibian breeding habitat in the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project area (see Map 4.4.3 in the Keystone EA in Appendix K of this Application). One of the wetlands was classified in the field as a bog and no amphibians were observed there. The other wetland is adjacent to the existing West Harrison FSR and observations there included 3 Pacific chorus frog egg masses, as well as 4 adult and 60 northwestern salamander (Ambystoma gracile) egg masses. Incidental Wildlife Observations Black bears and deer were relatively common in the Project area, and one juvenile Sharp-shinned Hawk (Accipiter striatus) and a Red-tailed Hawk were observed during 2008 field surveys, and appeared to be hunting. One pika was also observed on the west side of the Project area. One tailed frog was observed during electrofishing surveys by fisheries crews in Big Silver Creek on October 3, 2006. Potential Environmental Effects The potential effects of the Project on wildlife, vegetation, and rare ecological communities can be divided into direct effects (e.g., mortality, habitat loss, displacement) and indirect effects (e.g., noxious weed dispersal, increase in hunting/poaching). Potential environmental effects are likely to fall under three main categories as described below. Habitat alteration and fragmentation can include: vegetation and habitat removal; maintenance of early seral habitat; fragmentation of habitats by roads, project facilities, or transmission line rights-of-way; invasive species establishment; introduction of silt or other deleterious substances to aquatic habitats; and introduction of harmful substances into the environment. Disturbance and/or displacement resulting from loud construction-related activities (e.g., blasting, helicopter use, and excavation) can disrupt dispersal, nesting, denning, hibernation, and foraging, in both the construction and operation Project footprints, as well as in adjacent habitats that are not directly affected by the Project. Human activity may lead to wildlife displacement and avoidance of high-suitability habitats by some species, and increased stress to wildlife that remain in the area. This can result in fitness and energetic consequences for individuals and/or populations of affected species. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 695 - Cloudworks October 2011 Access management and mortality: increased road use can lead to an increase in disturbance or possibly an increase in vehicle-related wildlife mortality. Road upgrades and new road construction can improve access into previously inaccessible areas, which can increase hunting and poaching, and further displace wildlife due to increased recreational activity. Smaller, less mobile species (small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians), juveniles/eggs, and species with very small home ranges may suffer direct mortality related to construction equipment and clearing. In addition, the presence of humans may provide attractants (i.e., garbage) that lead to problem animals (e.g., black bears), which may result in problem animal mortality. Avian species may suffer direct mortality from power line interactions such as collisions or electrocution. During the operations and maintenance phase of the Project, concerns regarding habitat alteration/fragmentation, displacement/disturbance, and access management/mortality will continue to exist, but for the most part these interactions will have less potential for resulting in adverse effects than during the construction phase, because the work force will be smaller and activities will be less frequent. Nonetheless, potential operational effects include more long-term effects that can continue to degrade the surrounding habitats, increasing pressure on species already rare on the landscape. Decommissioning effects would typically be similar to those occurring during the construction phase. Habitat Alteration and Fragmentation Habitat Loss and Alteration Much of the area around the Project has a long history of logging resulting in large areas with younger forest. There are still a few patches of older forest remaining, but these are generally at higher elevations. Habitat loss has been identified as the primary threat to species at risk in Canada and can have a negative impact on both populations and communities (Venter et al. 2006; Eigenbrod et al. 2008a). Removal of vegetation and earthworks may affect local populations of wildlife species with small home ranges or specific habitat needs. Alteration and loss of habitat can also lead to an increase in predation, decrease in security cover, decrease in food supply, changes in microclimates and hydrology, and removal of some foraging areas. Microclimate alterations can be associated with a change in shade, temperature, and moisture retention. This could have a negative effect on rare plants and less mobile wildlife species such as amphibians and Pacific sideband that rely on vegetation, litter fall, and CWD for thermoregulation, moisture and cover (Gallant et al. 2007; COSEWIC 2006). Blasting through rock cliffs, rock outcrops, and talus slopes could potentially remove thermal habitats for snakes, and possibly result in direct mortality. Two beaches located on the west side of Harrison Lake offer perhaps the highest quality of habitat for rare plants. One beach is located on the north side of Tretheway Creek near the powerhouse, where Rorippa sp. nov. was observed. This species was also observed south of Tretheway, close to the proposed transmission line, along with the Red-listed Berula erecta. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 696 - Cloudworks October 2011 The population of Fontinalis hypnoides found on the lakeshore beach habitat is likely to be a part of a larger population around the shores of Harrison Lake. One other sub-population of this species was historically known at Harrison Hot Springs, at the south end of the lake, though the species is probably extirpated there owing to development and habitat loss. The plants in the Project area were not rooted where they were found, but were stranded there as water levels receded. Thus, this can be seen as a transient occurrence. The plants were infertile, so this was also a non-reproducing occurrence. The source populations of these plants are likely to be found nearby on submerged substrates such as logs or rocks. Loss of riparian vegetation and extreme changes in water levels within the diversion reach between the powerhouse and intake sites may result in negative impacts to a variety of riverine specialists, including Harlequin Ducks (Heath and Montevecchi 2008; COSEWIC 2006). The loss of riparian vegetation removes shade and litter fall, thus changing nutrient cycling in the waterbody, and may increase water temperatures (Richardson 2008). The loss of riparian vegetation also decreases security cover, and may eliminate suitable foraging habitat for some species (Richardson 2008; Naiman et al. 1993; Mensing et al. 1998). The change in flow can also decrease the width of the stream and potentially increase water temperature. The change in flow and/or increase in temperature could affect the prey population for some riverine specialists, although recent literature suggests that a more stable flow in the diversion reach may also provide more foraging opportunities during operation (Esler et al. 2007). Removal or alteration of important habitat features may also have detrimental effects on species that require specific habitat characteristics found in older forest stands. Northern Goshawks and Spotted Owls require features associated with old-growth stands, such as high canopy closure, snags, and CWD. These features are particularly important for goshawks in post-fledging areas, where fledglings learn how to fly and hunt, and during which time they are extremely vulnerable to predation (McClaren 2004). Conversion of older forests to younger ones may reduce such features on the landscape, as well as reduce the number of suitable nesting areas for goshawks and Spotted Owls, decrease prey abundance and accessibility, reduce juvenile dispersal and gene flow, and alter the microclimate conditions within interior forests (McClaren 2004). Spotted Owls were not detected during surveys at select sites, but one goshawk was observed along the proposed transmission line on the west side of Harrison Lake. Cavity-nesters such as Western Screech-owls, as well as Olive-sided Flycatchers who require suitable perching trees and cavities within mature stands (Campbell et al. 1997), may also be negatively affected if nest sites are removed when clearing mature and old riparian stands and wildlife trees. No Western Screech-owls were detected in the Big Silver Creek area, and Project facilities will only remove habitat rated as Low or Nil. Finally, a large number of migratory birds breed in temperate forests within British Columbia during the spring and summer months. These birds nest in a variety of habitats including wetlands, grasslands, shrub-dominated landscapes, and forests. Vegetation clearing during the breeding season can lead to nest abandonment and possibly death. While most vegetation clearing is expected during construction, vegetation maintenance along the transmission line will be done every few years during operations. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 697 - Cloudworks October 2011 Forest Fragmentation Habitat loss generally leads to fragmentation of habitats (Andren 1994), which can have long-term negative consequences for some ecosystems and species. Habitat fragmentation can influence wildlife populations in several ways, including blocking movement corridors, changing the distribution of species, reducing the amount of suitable forest interior habitat for some species, reducing gene flow, and potentially increasing nest predation and parasitism due to edge effects (Robinson et al. 1995; Saunders et al. 1991). Fragmentation can affect migration, mate selection, and dispersal between drainages and reduce the ability of species to travel between areas of high quality habitat, particularly for species that avoid open areas. Fragmentation creates more edge habitats, which may facilitate access for edge-dwelling predators, such as Great Horned Owls (Bubo virginianus), Red-tailed Hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), and raccoons (Procyon lotor). Increased predator access could increase predation rates on adult and juvenile goshawks (McClaren 2004) and other animals. Red-tailed Hawks may also indirectly compete with goshawks for suitable nest sites, especially in small, isolated forest patches, since goshawks typically nest further from edges, while Red-tailed Hawks nest adjacent to clearings (Northern Goshawk Recovery Team 2008). Species that are better adapted to edge habitats, such as Barred Owls, may also increase with increased fragmentation and could potentially displace species such as Spotted Owls (Kelly et al. 2003). Spotted Owls are considered to be an interior forest species (i.e., they live well away from the edge of forest stands) and generally avoid open areas, flying within and underneath the canopy of adjacent forest stands. It is believed that owls avoid open areas to reduce the risk of predation by predators that use forest edge habitats (e.g., Great Horned Owls) (Forsman et al. 2002). Decreased habitat connectivity is associated with lower owl productivity, lower juvenile dispersal success, an increase in inter-specific competition (e.g., from Barred Owls), and an increase in predation (SOMIT 1997). Other species such as Olive-sided Flycatchers may benefit from increased edge habitat, so long as mature stands with suitable snag and cavity trees are maintained along and near habitat edges (Robertson and Hutton 2007). Habitat fragmentation and obstruction can be associated with corridors of unsuitable habitat (i.e., open roads) that may function as filters (few individuals cross) or barriers (no individuals cross) for some wildlife populations (Jalkotzy et al. 1997). Construction of a 20 m-wide road removes 1 ha of vegetation per 500 m of linear distance (Jalkotzy et al. 1997). Animals with low mobility, such as amphibians, may be especially sensitive to mortality and reduced movements due to roads, especially where roads bisect seasonal migrations between aquatic and forested habitats (Waye 1999; Marsh et al. 2005, Eigenbrod et al. 2008b). Marsh et al. (2005) found roads could reduce gene flow in salamander populations and that wider roads were greater barriers to gene flow. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 698 - Cloudworks October 2011 Wildlife species with large home ranges can also be negatively affected by fragmentation. Grizzly bears avoid areas that are fragmented by development, including areas with roads and other human influences (Apps et al. 2004). Linear developments create barriers to bear movement and increase mortality, especially when development exists along valley bottoms (Apps and Hamilton 2002). In particular, Waller and Serveheen (2005) found that grizzly bears in their study area did not go within 500 m of highways and Gibeau et al. (2001) found that female bears did not cross high-volume highways. Fragmentation can prevent wildlife from accessing high quality habitat and suppress genetic diversity by inhibiting normal mate selection and dispersal activities (Proctor et al. 2005). Black bears are by far the most common bear species in the study area. Grizzly bears are not known to be resident in the study areas on the east side of Harrison Lake, although there may be a few transient bears (C. Apps pers. comm., June 2008). Conversely, roads with little or no traffic (closed roads) may be used as travel corridors by a variety of wildlife including ungulates (Marcum 1975, cited in Storlie 1996), bears (Smith 1978; Mace et al. 1996) and wolves (Whittington et al. 2004). Roadside vegetation can provide an attractive source of forage for bears and ungulates (Jalkotzy et al. 1997), but attractants such as garbage and forage along roads can also increase risk of collision mortality (Waller and Serveheen 2005). Invasive Species Degradation of habitat and deliberate or accidental introduction of invasive plants can promote largescale alterations in plant communities. Continued changes in land use, together with the spread of the human population, has made it possible for invasive species to increase their ranges, sometimes to the extent that they crowd out native species and threaten natural habitats. Invasive alien plants and animals present a growing environmental and economic threat to British Columbia. It is thought that invasive species are the second greatest threat to species at risk after habitat destruction (Rankin et al. 2004). COSEWIC estimates that 25% of endangered species, 31% of threatened species, and 16% of species of Special Concern are negatively affected by invasive species across Canada. Invasive species are introduced species that are able to out-compete native species and threaten biodiversity (Rankin et al. 2004). Invasives are typically open habitat species, and are therefore better adapted to habitat fragmentation and edge habitats (Charbonneau and Fahrig 2004). Many non-native species out-compete native plants past the germination stage, by growing rhizomatously below ground, by sequestering water or nutrients more vigorously than natives, or by shading out native plants by overtopping them. The introduction of invasive species can lower biodiversity, alter nutrient cycling, change hydrology, and carry diseases to native species (Rankin et al. 2004). Construction will involve the transportation of materials and machinery through areas of known invasive species occurrence, which could contribute to the spread of invasive species. Construction may also occur in areas of previously unidentified invasive species populations, also resulting in their spread. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 699 - Cloudworks October 2011 Construction equipment and materials may also introduce invasive species into previously unaffected areas. The roads running along the east and west sides of Harrison Lake and existing power lines in the area can act as dispersal corridors for non-native species and are likely the primary sources of existing exotic plant invasion into the study area. The presence of new permanent roads can facilitate the increase of invasive species along the forest edge (Watkins et al. 2003; Gelbard and Belnap 2003). The construction of transmission lines and improvements to the road system will potentially increase the risk for invasive species to become established (Sorensen 1984). Soil disturbance will create areas of exposed soil that provide favourable seedbed conditions for the establishment of invasive species; alien species are particularly effective at invading and becoming established in newly disturbed areas. During operations and maintenance, particularly of the transmission line rights-of-way, maintenance vehicles may carry and disperse the seeds of invasive plant species (Schmidt 1989; Fraser Basin Council 2004). Additional detail about non-native and invasive species is provided in Section 6.2.1 of the Keystone EA in Appendix K of this Application. A review of known invasive alien plant species (IAPS) locations in proximity to the Project has been conducted using the invasive alien plant program (IAPP), a web-based mapping and reporting tool developed by the Province of British Columbia. This tool allows users to both report on and search a provincial map base for known IAPS locations. A search of all Project areas has been completed and all recorded IAPS sites and the associated species present on the sites have been identified. The IAPP has identified a number of known IAPS sites within the Big Silver LU (see maps in Appendix E of the Hedberg EA in Appendix R). IAPS sites have been identified along construction access routes and within planned materials staging areas. The storage and movement of construction materials within these areas increases the potential for transport and spread of the IAPS into the Project area during the construction phases of the projects. The existing barge landing located at the mouth of the Big Silver Creek at East Bay on Harrison Lake may be used as a staging area for construction phases of the Big Silver Creek and Shovel Creek Waterpower Projects. A number of invasive species have been identified at the barge landing site, including Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), Bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), St. John‟s wort (Hypercium perforatum), Himalayan blackberry (Rubis discolor), and Spotted knapweed (Centaurea biebersteinii). Additionally, a number of IAPS sites have been identified along the main access route between the barge landing and the Project area, including St. John‟s wort, Canada thistle, Common tansy (Tanacetum vulgare), and Oxeye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare). Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 700 - Cloudworks October 2011 Introduction of Silt and Other Harmful Substances Construction activities within riparian zones could potentially lead to a discharge of silt into waterways within the Project area. Removal of vegetation for Project facilities may also decrease the amount of water that is intercepted, and subsequently increase the potential for erosion and sedimentation. These impacts could have long-term effects for some wildlife species, such as amphibians. The effects of siltation may not be localized to the footprint, but may extend for some distance downstream of the disturbance, depending on the amount of silt released. Increased turbidity affects amphibian eggs, larvae, and adults by interfering with respiration, forage, and shelter (Matsuda et al. 2006). Fine sediments can fill interstitial spaces within streambeds, which can effectively eliminate important amphibian micro-habitats (Welsh and Ollivier 1998). This is a particular threat to tailed frog tadpoles that require clear streams with low levels of sediment. Interstitial spaces provide them with foraging substrates and thermal and predatory refuge (Dupuis and Steventon 1999). Increased sedimentation in waterways may also prevent tailed frog larvae from adhering to rocks, eliminating their ability to feed effectively. Fine sediments may alter the food webs of amphibians, and impair respiration of aquatic amphibians by clogging their gills (Jackson et al. 2007). Hydrocarbons, coolants, and other fluids found in construction machinery are toxic and may persist in aquatic and terrestrial environments (Suchanek 1993; Trombulak and Frissell 2000). Pollution by oil, gasoline, or other waste may affect amphibian breeding sites and lower survivorship. The permeable skin of amphibians makes them particularly susceptible to harmful chemicals in the environment (Stuart et al. 2004; Blaustein et al. 2003). Hydrocarbons can interfere with amphibian respiration, cause liver disorders, kill food sources, affect metamorphosis and inhibit growth (Lefcort et al. 1997). Herbicides Transmission line right-of-way maintenance may include the application of herbicides. Herbicide application may cause negative effects on plants and wildlife around transmission lines, depending on the product used and how it is used. Toxicity of herbicides is often dependent on the herbicide‟s main ingredient, the surfactant used to apply it, and the wildlife species that is exposed (Perkins et al. 2000; Howe et al. 2004). Only a few ingredients have been tested adequately to determine their potential effects. The effects of the majority of herbicide ingredients (including how they interact with each other) are still relatively unknown (Shepard et al. 2004; Tatum 2004; Guynn et al. 2004). Herbicides are not a major concern for widespread plant species and plant communities, because the larger common plant population outside the treated area provides a seed-bank for future re-colonization. However, rare plants and rare ecosystems are, by definition, uncommon on the landscape. Non-targeted herbicide applications that occur in areas that contain rare plant species could potentially extirpate the species locally. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 701 - Cloudworks October 2011 The use of herbicides may change invertebrate community composition, and reduce invertebrate species diversity and abundance (Freemark and Boutin 1995; Taylor et al. 2006). The effects on vegetation may also reduce the availability of berries and preferred forage plants for wildlife (Hamilton et al. 1991; Gagne et al. 1999; Kelly and Cumming 1992, 1994), which may cause diet shifts and displacement of wildlife species (Freemark and Boutin 1995). Amphibians are particularly susceptible to the potential negative effects of herbicides due to their aquatic life habit, permeable skin, and unprotected eggs (Bishop and Pettit 1992). Herbicides are known to cause mortality in amphibians (both terrestrial and aquatic) if they are applied in sufficient concentrations (Chen et al. 2004; Relyea 2004, 2005a, 2005b, 2005c). In addition, herbicide applications to aquatic vegetation could result in short-term changes in vegetation abundance and potentially long-term changes in vegetation diversity and composition within aquatic habitats. The presence of vegetation, especially emergent vegetation, within aquatic habitats is important for a number of amphibian species during breeding, as well as for providing security cover for adults and juveniles. Disturbance and/or Displacement Loud construction-related activities, such as drilling, blasting, excavation, helicopter use, and tree falling, may disturb a variety of wildlife depending on the type of activity, how close the activity is, the frequency of the activity, and the species‟ susceptibility to disturbance (Swaddle and Page 2007; Frid and Dill 2002; Oehler et al. 2005; Delaney and Grubb 2004). Raptor species and Great Blue Herons are sensitive to loud noises in close proximity to nest sites and may abandon nests in response to disturbance. Nest abandonment can have fitness and energetic consequences (Hayes and Buchanan 2001). Northern Goshawks and Bald Eagles are particularly sensitive during the early stages of nesting, including courtship, nest building, and egg-laying (McClaren 2004; USFWS 2006), although eagles will often acclimatize to the disturbance if it is perceived to be nonthreatening. Raptors are less likely to abandon nests during the late incubation and nestling periods. However, if adults are startled and flushed from nest sites, eggs and young will become vulnerable to the elements and to predators, and nestlings may be inadequately fed (McClaren 2004; USFWS 2006). Harlequin Ducks changed patterns of habitat use and displayed increased vigilance and flight behaviour during white-water rafting activity in Jasper National Park (Hunt 1995, as cited in Jalkotzy et al. 1997), and a long-term decline in one Harlequin Duck population was correlated with an increase of recreational boaters (Clarkson 1992, as cited in Jalkotzy et al. 1997). This suggests that other human activities, such as construction and maintenance, may also lead to behavioural changes by Harlequin Ducks. Deer may also be displaced from suitable winter habitat if they are disturbed by adjacent activity and noise, which may have fitness consequences if less forage or shelter is available outside of wintering ranges. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 702 - Cloudworks October 2011 Roads are often cited as having the greatest effects of disturbance on wildlife (Jalkotzy et al. 1997). Repeated disturbances from traffic on roads may cause some species to avoid the area around active roads, resulting in a net decrease in available habitat, as well as changes in daily and seasonal movement patterns. Some individuals of some species may habituate to traffic and other human disturbance, resulting in less avoidance behaviour (Jalkotzy et al. 1997; Thompson and Henderson 1998). Habituation is most likely when the disturbance is low-level, predictable in frequency, and is not associated with a physical threat. Grizzly bears often habituate to human activities, such as crowds of bear viewers along roadsides in Yellowstone. However, habituated bears generally encounter humans more frequently and are therefore more vulnerable to both death by shooting and to becoming conditioned to associate human beings with food sources (Herrero et al. 2005). Access Management and Mortality Increased Hunting Mortality Increased human presence in the study area due to Project construction and maintenance may result in increased poaching and hunting of species such as deer, goats, and bears. This may affect local large mammal populations. Increased Road Mortality Roads used during Project construction and operation will be subject to increased vehicle traffic and this may result in an increase in wildlife mortality due to collisions with vehicles. Adult amphibians may be killed or injured while crossing roads, and western toads are particularly vulnerable to road mortality as they are attracted to open areas and may spend a great deal of time on roads (COSEWIC 2002b). If masses of toadlets migrate across roads while construction traffic is heavy, a significant number of individuals may be killed in a short period of time. Owls and other birds, small mammals, and ungulates may also be killed or injured by road traffic. Scavengers such as bears and coyotes might be attracted to roadkill and may be hit while feeding on the carrion. Direct Mortality Some wildlife species may be susceptible to direct mortality during construction and vegetation removal. Adult amphibians have low mobility and are thought to remain in close proximity to riparian areas (Richardson et al. 2005; Matsuda and Richardson 1999). In late summer or fall, juvenile western toads (toadlets) can congregate in large numbers along the sides of breeding pools before dispersing. Clearing of riparian vegetation and the movement of large construction machinery within riparian areas during construction may cause direct mortalities of western toads/toadlets and other amphibians. Clearing activities that occur in low-elevation, deciduous or mixed forests, particularly moist forests containing bigleaf maple and stinging nettle, could cause direct mortality (particularly where road upgrades or new road construction occurs) of provincially-listed invertebrates (e.g., Pacific sideband) (BC MOE 2007A). Direct loss of individuals or whole populations of rare plants is possible if power line poles, facilities, or new access roads are constructed on areas where rare plants are growing. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 703 - Cloudworks October 2011 Problem Animal Mortality The encroachment of human habitation and development into BC‟s natural landscape inevitably leads to continuing interactions between people and wildlife, often leading to injuries or fatalities for both parties. This is most evident when people have close encounters with large mammals including ungulates, cougars, and bears. Many of these encounters are a result of people working or recreating in wildlife foraging and breeding sites; however, in some instances they occur when wildlife is conditioned to associate humans with food. Improper storage and/or disposal of garbage, especially food wastes, may attract bears to construction sites. Individual bears that learn that people are sources of food can become problems and pose a risk to people. Feeding any sort of wildlife, including the installation of bird feeders, may attract bears, although bears are also known to be attracted to substances such as motor oil, fuel, coolants, and paint. Bears can also become habituated to humans in the absence of food sources (Herrero et al. 2005). Those bears may reduce their fleeing response in the presence of humans (Herrero 1985; Herrero et al. 2005), resulting in increased human-bear confrontations. The majority of problem bears display a combination of habituation to humans and attraction to human food sources (Davis et al. 2002). Mother bears often pass these behaviours onto their cubs, which stay with their mothers for 1 to 3 years (Davis et al. 2002). The result is a continuing cycle of problem bears. Avian Mortality from Transmission Line Avian mortality caused from bird-power line interactions result from either collision or electrocution. In some cases, collisions and electrocutions of birds have contributed to declines in local and regional populations, thus raising important concerns for wildlife managers (Bevanger 1994; Janss and Ferrer 1998; Dorin and Spiegel 2005). This may be an important risk for some rare and endangered species (Bevanger 1994; Savereno et al. 1996; Janss and Ferrer 1998). Collision Factors influencing collision risk include the design layout of the power line, species-specific bird behaviour, and bird population densities. The chance of collision increases if the power lines bisect seasonal or daily migration paths, such as shorelines and wetlands (Dorin and Spiegel 2005). Nocturnal or diurnal periods of activity (Bevanger 1994), in-flight manoeuvrability, and the altitude at which birds fly all affect collision potential (Dorin and Spiegel 2005). According to McNeil et al. (1985) and Bevanger (1994), power lines located between feeding areas and roosting sites for wetland birds can have increased risk of bird collision, particularly when a short distance separates the two as birds must make a short flight at a critical height. Inexperienced birds (Janss 2000) or birds exhibiting territorial or courtship behaviour can also be at higher risk of collision (APLIC and USFWS 2005) as a result of decreased alertness. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 704 - Cloudworks October 2011 Bird collisions are generally a result of poor visibility of suspended wires. Many collisions occur at the thinner, less visible overhead static lines (APLIC and USFWS 2005). Static wires act as safeguards to protect against power outages caused from lightning strikes. Savereno et al. (1996) found that 82% of all collisions in their study were with static wires. These lines are particularly difficult to see during fog, rain, snow or other weather conditions that decrease overall visibility. If an overhead ground wire is not part of the design then the risk of bird collision will be reduced. Electrocution Electrocutions result when a bird completes a circuit, by coming into contact with both an energized wire (conductor) and another energized wire or the utility pole. The resultant shock kills the bird and may cause a power outage or, in extreme cases, a wildfire. Some estimates suggest that 5 to 15% of all power outages in the United States can be attributed to birds interacting with power lines and utility structures (Partners in Flight 2005). Two types of electrocution can occur: phase-to-phase, when the wingspan (usually wrist to wrist) of a bird comes into contact with two separate conductors; and phase-to-ground, when the bird contacts one conductor and the grounded support pole. A number of factors influence the risk that birds will be electrocuted. Species that are more likely to be electrocuted include eagles, hawks, owls, vultures, and other large birds (APLIC 2006), as their large body sizes have greater chance of bridging the distance between conductors or between a conductor and a grounded utility pole (Bevanger 1998). Mitigation The assessment considers measures to mitigate potential Project effects during construction, operation, and decommissioning. The location, configuration, and design of Project facilities already integrates mitigative measures; in particular, the areal extent of disturbance has been minimized, sensitive habitats and high-quality ecological areas (e.g., climax communities, such as old-growth forest) have been avoided, and facilities have been sited and/or routed in or adjacent to areas of previous disturbance to the extent feasible. In addition, facility location and configuration considers maintenance of connectivity between mature forest stands, and between other high value habitats, such as riparian areas. This approach will continue to be used for final siting and routing during detailed Project design. During construction and operation, Cloudworks will employ other avoidance measures, such as selecting the most appropriate construction methods, equipment, and materials, and timing activities to avoid sensitive periods. Additional mitigation measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to avoid, eliminate, or reduce potential environmental effects will be documented in the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) and the Operating Parameters and Procedures (OPP). (See Section 20 for more information about the CEMP and OPP.) The CEMP and OPP also will identify the location of sensitive habitat features and known rare plant and rare ecological communities, as appropriate. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 705 - Cloudworks October 2011 The proposed mitigation measures have been developed based on a review of applicable regulatory requirements and standards, guidelines, codes of practice, BMPs, and prior regulatory approvals of similar projects, consultation with regulatory agencies (federal and provincial) and First Nations, and professional experience of the study team. Mitigation measures are described in detail in Section 6.3 of the Keystone EA in Appendix K of this Application. For each VEC, mitigation measures are summarized in the residual effects analysis summary tables in the following section. Residual Environmental Effects Assessment The potential residual environmental effects of the Project on all terrestrial wildlife and vegetation VECs are summarized below. For each VEC, the potential environmental effects, proposed mitigation, expected residual environmental effect, potential for cumulative environmental effects, and need for follow-up monitoring are summarized in tabular form. Where residual environmental effects are predicted, they are characterized using the following key. For more information on specific rating criteria, refer to Section 4 of the Application and/or to Section 6.4 of the Keystone EA in Appendix K. Key to Residual Environmental Effects Characterization Criteria Residual Effect: Y = Yes N = No Reversibility: R = Reversible I = Irreversible Direction: P = Positive A = Adverse Context: L = Low resilience to disturbance H = High resilience to disturbance Magnitude: N = Negligible L = Low M = Moderate H = High Probability/Likelihood: L = Low probability to occur, unlikely M = Moderate probability to occur H = High probability to occur, likely Extent: S = Sub-local L = Local R = Regional Duration: S = Short term L = Long term P = Permanent Frequency: I = Infrequent, Rare F = Frequent, Regular C = Continuous Significance: S = Significant N = Not significant Level of Confidence: L = Low M = Moderate H = High Cumulative Environmental Effect: Y = Yes, residual effect of the Project may or is likely to interact cumulatively with the effects of other projects or activities N = No, residual effect of the Project will not or is unlikely to interact cumulatively with the effects of other projects or activities Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 706 - Cloudworks October 2011 Pacific Tailed Frog Pacific tailed frogs are assumed to be in most suitable streams in the Project area. Potential environmental effects on tailed frogs will be localized at upgraded stream crossings, most notably within the diversion reach, and during riparian clearing in close proximity to suitable streams. Risks during operation will include maintenance (i.e., herbicide application) around streams and flow regulation within the diversion reach itself. Mitigation for Pacific tailed frogs is expected to reduce environmental effects on aquatic and terrestrial habitat and potential risk of mortality (notably tadpoles). Stream siltation cannot be completely avoided, due to the nature of the work within the stream itself. However, well-defined guidelines will be in place that will direct work in these sensitive areas to prevent measurable increases in turbidity and greatly reduce the likelihood of a serious event. Residual environmental effects are still anticipated after the implementation of the mitigation measures, but only during construction. Decommissioning would likely have similar anticipated effects. None are considered significant. The analysis of residual environmental effects on Pacific tailed frogs is summarized in Table 15-25. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Table 15-25 Cloudworks October 2011 - 707 - Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Pacific Tailed Frog (Big Silver Creek) Magnitude Extent Duration/ Frequency Reversibility Context Probability/ Likelihood Significance Confidence Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Proposed Mitigation Direction Potential Effect Residual Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Characterization Y A N S-L S/I R L M N H Y No Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and fragmentation Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with ground cover, shrubs, or trees that are regionally appropriate (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Connectivity at stream crossings will be encouraged by limiting riparian clearing to the access road footprint or penstock where they cross the stream. Creek crossings (for creeks with year-round flow) will be surveyed prior to construction to determine tailed frog presence. Water diverted around construction site will be returned to the same stream immediately downstream of the work site when tailed frog tadpoles are observed. Construction and maintenance activities in and around watercourses will conform to Standards and Best Practices for Instream Works (BC MWLAP 2004), Best Management Practices for Amphibians and Reptiles (Ovaska et al. 2004), and other approved work practices, where feasible. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 708 - Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Residual Effect? Direction Magnitude Extent Duration/ Frequency Reversibility Context Probability/ Likelihood Significance Confidence Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Residual Environmental Effects Characterization Introduction of silt and other harmful substances BMPs will be followed for in-stream works. CEMP will include sections on managing construction waste, spill prevention, and emergency response. Maintenance and refuelling will be conducted at an approved distance away from watercourses. Equipment will be checked to ensure systems are free of leaks and in good condition. All machines working near water will have spill kit, trained operators. Erosion and sedimentation plan will be in place. Clearing, grubbing will be minimized, especially in wet weather. Natural vegetation cover, woody debris, and organic matter will be retained when possible. Disturbed areas will be revegetated as soon as possible with regionally appropriate species. Y A N S-L S/I R L L N H Y No Direct mortality As above for habitat loss. Permits will be in place to salvage tailed frog tadpoles (or adults) during diversion of any stream for intake or penstock construction. Y A N S S/I R L M N H Y No Habitat alteration, mortality due to herbicide use CEMP will include pest management plan with guidance for herbicide use. Broadcast spraying of chemical defoliants will be avoided around potential breeding sites. N N No Flow regulation in diversion reach Flow within diversion reach will be maintained as defined by operating parameters set by provincial government. Strategies will be in place to maintain fish habitat as described in Aquatic Environment section. N N No Operation Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 709 - Western Toad Western toads were not observed during field studies, but they are likely to occur within the study area. Toads can breed in a variety of temporary or permanent water features, as long as water is present until toadlets are ready to disperse. Only a small portion of Moderate suitability breeding habitat overlaps any Project component. This 0.2 ha area would likely not be affected by construction, as the transmission line will likely clear-span over that portion of the wetland. Large toad migrations are not anticipated but are possible at some ephemeral breeding sites. Risks during operation will include maintenance (i.e., herbicide application) around streams. Mitigation to reduce disturbance to potential breeding areas (including an erosion and sedimentation plan), avoid herbicide use in sensitive areas, and monitor for migrating toads is expected to eliminate potential environmental effects on western toad populations during construction and operation (Table 15-26). Decommissioning activities will be similar to those observed during construction. Thus, no residual environmental effects on western toads are predicted. Proposed Mitigation Follow-up Required? Potential Effect Cumulative Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Western Toad (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-26 No No No Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and fragmentation Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Connectivity at stream crossings will be encouraged by limiting riparian clearing to the access road footprint. Larger culverts or bridge crossings will be used. Construction and maintenance activities in and around watercourses will conform to Standards and Best Practices for Instream Works (BC MWLAP 2004), Best Management Practices for Amphibians and Reptiles (Ovaska et al. 2004), and other approved work practices, where feasible. Cloudworks October 2011 Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? - 710 - Residual Effect? Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Introduction of silt and other harmful substances CEMP will include sections on managing construction waste, spill prevention, and emergency response. Maintenance and refuelling will be conducted at an approved distance away from watercourses. Equipment will be checked to ensure systems are free of leaks and in good condition. All machines working near water will have a spill kit, trained operators. Erosion and sedimentation plan will be in place. Clearing, grubbing will be minimized, especially in wet weather. Natural vegetation cover, woody debris, and organic matter will be retained when possible. Disturbed areas will be revegetated as soon as possible with regionally appropriate species. No No No Increased road mortality and direct mortality Construction activities will be avoided in/around wetlands (where amphibian breeding is noted) to extent feasible. If unavoidable, construction in these areas will be scheduled after breeding is complete and toadlets/juveniles have dispersed where feasible and appropriate. Natural drainage will be maintained to protect wetland hydrology. If construction cannot be rescheduled, Environmental Monitor will install fencing to direct amphibian migrations away from roads, or culverts to be installed to direct amphibians safely across the road. These measures will be monitored during peak amphibian activity to ensure they are effective. Congregrations and mortality of toadlets/amphibians will be reported to Environmental Monitor, who will identify problem areas and implement additional measures (such as fencing), as required. No No See mitigation Habitat alteration, mortality due to herbicide use Maintenance workers will be informed of potential amphibian use and/or congregations if maintenance activities occur during the times of the year when congregations are anticipated. CEMP will include pest management plan with guidance for herbicide use. Broadcast spraying of chemical defoliants will be avoided around potential breeding sites. No No No Increased road mortality Maintenance work in or adjacent to known locations of amphibian congregations identified during construction will be scheduled for times when congregations are absent, to the extent feasible. Congregrations and mortality of toadlets/amphibians will be reported to Environmental Monitor, who will identify problem areas and implement additional measures (such as fencing), as required. No No No Operation Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 711 - Red-legged Frog Amphibian breeding was observed at a wetland on the west side of Harrison Lake, adjacent to the proposed transmission line, but the species involved were not red-legged frogs. It is possible that redlegged frogs occur in the study area but none were observed during field studies. The transmission line overlaps 0.2 ha of a Moderate-rated wetland in the area and this is not likely to be affected by Project construction or operation, as the transmission line will likely clear-span over that portion of the wetland. Mitigation to avoid wetlands, maintain wetland hydrology and water quality, and avoid herbicide use in sensitive areas is expected to avoid the potential for residual environmental effects to red-legged frogs during construction and operation (Table 15-27). Decommissioning will be similar to construction. No residual environmental effects on red-legged frogs are predicted. Proposed Mitigation Follow-up Required? Potential Effect Cumulative Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Red-legged Frog (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-27 No No No Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and fragmentation Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Connectivity at stream crossings will be encouraged by limiting riparian clearing to the access road footprint. Larger culverts or bridge crossings will be used. Construction and maintenance activities in and around watercourses will conform to Standards and Best Practices for Instream Works (BC MWLAP 2004), Best Management Practices for Amphibians and Reptiles (Ovaska et al. 2004), and other approved work practices, where feasible. Cloudworks October 2011 Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? - 712 - Residual Effect? Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Introduction of silt and other harmful substances CEMP will include sections on managing construction waste, spill prevention, and emergency response. Maintenance and refuelling will be conducted at an approved distance away from watercourses. Equipment will be checked to ensure systems are free of leaks and in good condition. All machines working near water will have a spill kit, trained operators. Erosion and sedimentation plan will be in place. Clearing, grubbing will be minimized, especially in wet weather. Natural vegetation cover, woody debris, and organic matter will be retained when possible. Disturbed areas will be revegetated as soon as possible with regionally appropriate species. No No No Increased road mortality and direct mortality Construction activities will be avoided in/around wetlands (where amphibian breeding is noted) to extent feasible. Natural drainage will be maintained to protect wetland hydrology. If unavoidable, construction in these areas scheduled after breeding is complete and juveniles have dispersed where feasible and appropriate. If construction cannot be rescheduled, Environmental Monitor will install fencing to direct amphibian migrations away from roads, or culverts to be installed to direct amphibians safely across the road. These measures will be monitored during peak amphibian activity to ensure they are effective. Congregrations and mortality of amphibians will be reported to Environmental Monitor, who will identify problem areas and implement additional measures (such as fencing), as required. No No See mitigation Habitat alteration, mortality due to herbicide use Maintenance workers will be informed of potential amphibian use and/or congregations if maintenance activities occur during the times of the year when congregations are anticipated. CEMP will include pest management plan with guidance for herbicide use. Broadcast spraying of chemical defoliants will be avoided around potential breeding sites. No No No Increased road mortality Maintenance work in or adjacent to known locations of amphibian congregations identified during construction will be scheduled for times when congregations are absent, to the extent feasible. Congregrations and mortality of toadlets/amphibians will be reported to Environmental Monitor, who will identify problem areas and implement additional measures (such as fencing), as required. No No No Operation Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 713 - Rubber Boa The population size and density of rubber boas in the Project area is unknown. Rubber boas were not located during the field program, but that was expected given the cryptic nature of the species. Potential effects on rubber boa, if any are present, include the removal or alteration of habitat and possible direct mortality during construction. Effects are not expected during operation, and decommissioning activities will be similar to construction. The removal of habitat is relatively small and any local population is not expected to be affected, as many of the Project footprints overlap previously disturbed sites and existing anthropogenic footprints (e.g., roads). No residual environmental effects on rubber boa are expected to occur after the applied mitigation (Table 15-28). Proposed Mitigation Follow-up Required? Potential Effect Cumulative Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Rubber Boa (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-28 No No No Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and fragmentation, associated mortality Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Northern Goshawk One Northern Goshawk was observed during surveys on the west side of Harrison Lake within suitable nesting habitat, approximately 3 km southeast of Tretheway Creek. The proposed transmission line in that area is down-slope from the suitable Northern Goshawk nesting habitat, adjacent to the existing FSR and BC Hydro transmission line. The Project will remove <1% of the High-rated habitat in the Project area (7.5 of 864.8 ha) and 2% of the Moderate-rated habitat (43.7 of 2,013.8 ha), mostly because of the transmission line. The permanent removal of this suitable habitat cannot be fully mitigated. A residual environmental effect is therefore anticipated, but it is not considered significant. No residual environmental effect is expected from operation or decommissioning. The analysis of residual environmental effects on Northern Goshawk is summarized in Table 15-29. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Table 15-29 Cloudworks October 2011 - 714 - Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Northern Goshawk (Big Silver Creek) Magnitude Extent Duration/ Frequency Reversibility Context Probability/ Likelihood Significance Confidence Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Proposed Mitigation Direction Potential Effect Residual Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Characterization Y A L L L/I R L M N H Y No Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and fragmentation Inactive or active nests found in close proximity to construction areas will be reported to the Environmental Monitor. Appropriate setback buffers will be established around active nests (if any are identified) (per BMPs in Demarchi and Bentley 2005, BC MOE 2006a) and will be monitored during construction, if work must commence during the breeding season and the active nest is adjacent to a work site. Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Rather than completely removing some large trees near the edge of a footprint, the possibility of creating snags by “stubbing” will be considered, providing it is safe to do so. Mature and old-growth forest will be avoided and existing disturbance corridors followed, where feasible. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 715 - Great Blue Heron Great Blue Herons were observed in the general vicinity, both outside and inside the local study area, but no nests were found. Potential environmental effects on Great Blue Heron during construction include removal of potential nesting habitat and nest disturbance due to noise. Potential effects associated with operation include interactions with the transmission line. Decommissioning activities will be similar to construction activities. Mitigation measures, including the removal of perching opportunities near conductors, will avoid or eliminate potential effects (Table 15-30). Therefore, no residual environmental effects on Great Blue Heron are predicted. Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Great Blue Heron (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-30 Great Blue Heron nests are protected by law; lead regulatory agency will be consulted if nests are identified in or near (within 500 m) final Project footprints. Areas within 500 m of any Project footprints will be surveyed prior to construction to identify any large stick nests. Inactive or active nests found in close proximity to construction areas will be reported to the Environmental Monitor. Appropriate setback buffers will be established around active nests (if any are identified) (per BMPs in Demarchi and Bentley 2005, BC MOE 2006a) and will be monitored during construction, if work must commence during the breeding season and the active nest is adjacent to a work site. If a vacant nest is located in a Project footprint and cannot be avoided, the lead regulatory agency will be consulted to develop a plan to relocate the nest. No No See mitigation The configuration of the conductors on the transmission line poles will reduce and likely eliminate potential for avian electrocution. If avian mortality due to collision or electrocution is suspected, the transmission line will be monitored and preventative measures put into place, under the guidance of a qualified professional biologist. No No See mitigation Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Construction and Decommissioning Nest loss and disturbance due to loud construction noise Operation Avian mortality from transmission line Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 716 - Olive-sided Flycatcher Few observations of Olive-sided Flycatchers occurred during the field program, possibly due to limited amounts of suitable habitat present in the local study area. Removal of Olive-sided Flycatcher habitat during construction will be negligible, as much of the forest within the immediate Project area has been previously cleared due to forestry. Mitigation measures will be in place to prevent destruction of active nest sites (Table 15-31). Potential effects associated with operation include interactions with the transmission line. Mitigation measures, including the removal of perching opportunities near conductors, will avoid or eliminate potential effects. Decommissioning is not expected to affect Olive-sided Flycatchers. Therefore, no residual environmental effects on Olive-sided Flycatcher are expected. Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Potential Effect Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Olive-sided Flycatcher (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-31 Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Mature and old-growth forest will be avoided and existing disturbance corridors followed, where feasible. No No No The configuration of the conductors on the transmission line poles will reduce and likely eliminate potential for avian electrocution. If avian mortality due to collision or electrocution is suspected, the transmission line will be monitored and preventative measures put into place, under the guidance of a qualified professional biologist. No No See mitigation Proposed Mitigation Construction Habitat loss Operation Avian mortality from transmission line Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 717 - Bald Eagle A Bald Eagle was observed along the proposed transmission line route, but no nests were observed during field studies. Potential environmental effects on eagles during construction include loss of potential nesting habitat and nest disturbance due to noise. Potential effects associated with operation include interactions with the transmission line. Decommissioning activities will be similar to construction activities. Mitigation measures, including the removal of perching opportunities near conductors, will avoid or eliminate potential effects (Table 15-32). Therefore, residual environmental effects are not anticipated. Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Bald Eagle (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-32 Bald Eagle nests are protected by law; lead regulatory agency will be consulted if nests are identified in or near (within 500 m) final Project footprints. Areas within 500 m of any Project footprints will be surveyed prior to construction to identify any large stick nests. Inactive or active nests found in close proximity to construction areas will be reported to the Environmental Monitor. Appropriate setback buffers will be established around active nests (if any are identified) (per BMPs in Demarchi and Bentley 2005, BC MOE 2006a) and will be monitored during construction, if work must commence during the breeding season and the active nest is adjacent to a work site. If a vacant nest is located in a Project footprint and cannot be avoided, the lead regulatory agency will be consulted to develop a plan to relocate the nest. No No See mitigation The configuration of the conductors on the transmission line poles will reduce and likely eliminate potential for avian electrocution. If avian mortality due to collision or electrocution is suspected, the transmission line will be monitored and preventative measures put into place, under the guidance of a qualified professional biologist. No No See mitigation Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Construction and Decommissioning Nest loss and disturbance due to loud construction noise Operation Avian mortality from transmission line Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 718 - American Dipper American Dippers were observed on Big Silver Creek during the field program. Habitat alteration and displacement due to disturbance would most likely occur during the construction period; however, a more stable flow in the diversion reach may also provide more foraging opportunities (i.e., potential positive environmental effect) during operation (Esler et al. 2007). No other effects on American Dippers are expected during operation. Instream works are planned over short periods during the dry season; therefore, with the implementation of other mitigation measures (Table 15-33), residual environmental effects from construction are not anticipated. Decommissioning will be similar to construction. Proposed Mitigation Follow-up Required? Potential Effect Cumulative Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, American Dipper (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-33 No No No Construction and Decommissioning Habitat alteration, displacement due to disturbance Instream works will be scheduled over short periods during dry season. Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 719 - Harlequin Duck One Harlequin Duck was observed on two separate occasions, well upstream of the proposed diversion reach. Habitat alteration and fragmentation would most likely occur during the construction period, as some riparian habitat will be permanently removed for facility footprints. Recent research has indicated a potential positive effect for foraging potential where stream flow is regulated (i.e., during operation) (Esler et al. 2007). Harlequin Ducks are easily disturbed by human activities along rivers and this would be most likely during construction. Mitigation measures to locate nesting sites prior to the commencement of any riparian work during the nesting season are expected to prevent nest abandonment (Table 15-34). Decommissioning will be similar to construction. Residual environmental effects are not anticipated. Project operation is not expected to affect Harlequin Ducks. Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Harlequin Duck (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-34 Habitat loss and fragmentation Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. No No No Disturbance due to loud construction noise Before construction within 50 m of suitable Harlequin Duck nesting habitat during the breeding season (April 1 to August 31), a Harlequin Duck nest survey will be conducted by a qualified professional in accordance with current standards and guidelines. If a suspected nest site is located, work will be delayed in the area until ducklings have left the area. No No No Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Construction and Decommissioning Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 720 - Western Screech-owl Western Screech-owls were not detected within the study area during call playback surveys and no High or Moderate-suitability habitat overlaps with project footprints. With the implementation of mitigation (Table 15-35), residual environmental effects are not anticipated. Neither operation nor decommissioning is expected to affect Western Screech-owls. Proposed Mitigation Follow-up Required? Potential Effect Cumulative Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Western Screech-owl (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-35 No No No Construction Habitat loss and fragmentation Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. If a nest tree is removed, placement of nest boxes will be considered. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Rather than completely removing some large trees near the edge of a footprint, the possibility of creating snags by “stubbing” will be considered, providing it is safe to do so. Mature and old-growth forest will be avoided and existing disturbance corridors followed, where feasible. Band-tailed Pigeon This species was not observed within the study area. Construction activities could remove a small amount of breeding and foraging habitat for this species. Mitigation measures to reduce the potential for nest destruction or abandonment (for all migratory birds) will diminish some effects, but habitat loss cannot be completely avoided. A residual environmental effect is anticipated, but it is not considered significant. Potential effects associated with operation include interactions with the transmission line. Mitigation measures, including the removal of perching opportunities near conductors, will avoid or eliminate residual environmental effects from operation. Decommissioning is not expected to affect Band-tailed Pigeon. The analysis of residual environmental effects on Band-tailed Pigeon is summarized in Table 15-36. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Table 15-36 Cloudworks October 2011 - 721 - Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Band-tailed Pigeon (Big Silver Creek) Duration/ Frequency Reversibility Context Probability/ Likelihood Significance A L L L/I R H M N The configuration of the conductors on the transmission line poles will reduce and likely eliminate potential for avian electrocution. If avian mortality due to collision or electrocution is suspected, the transmission line will be monitored and preventative measures put into place, under the guidance of a qualified professional biologist. N Follow-up Required? Extent Y Cumulative Effect? Magnitude Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Confidence Direction Potential Effect Residual Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Characterization H Y No N No Construction Habitat loss and fragmentation Operation Avian mortality from transmission line Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 722 - Migratory Birds The potential effects of the Project on migratory birds include nest abandonment and direct mortality due to clearing during construction and for right-of-way maintenance during operation. Other potential effects associated with operation include interactions with the transmission line. Mitigation measures, including the removal of perching opportunities near conductors, will avoid or eliminate residual environmental effects (Table 15-37). Decommissioning is not expected to affect migratory birds. Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Migratory Birds (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-37 Vegetation clearing will take place outside of the breeding bird season (March 15 to August 15) where possible to prevent disturbance of bird nests If clearing takes place during the breeding season, qualified professionals will complete nest surveys prior to construction to determine if nesting is occurring in the area. If nests are located, appropriate setback buffers for disturbance will be applied. No No No Avian mortality from transmission line The configuration of the conductors on the transmission line poles will reduce and likely eliminate potential for avian electrocution. If avian mortality due to collision or electrocution is suspected, the transmission line will be monitored and preventative measures put into place, under the guidance of a qualified professional biologist. No No See mitigation Nest abandonment and direct mortality due to clearing As above for construction. No No No Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Construction Nest abandonment and direct mortality due to clearing Operation Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 723 - Cloudworks October 2011 Spotted Owl Spotted Owls have been detected on both sides of Harrison Lake; once on the west side in the early 1990s, and on the east side, several kilometres away from the proposed facilities. The provincial government has established a SRMZ overlapping Tretheway Creek, but habitat retention objectives there have been relaxed to accommodate greater habitat retention in other SRMZs in the Fraser Canyon. The Project will remove <1% (12.6 ha) of High and Moderate suitability habitat in the local study area. In total, the Big Silver footprints overlap with 41.5 ha of the SRMZ. Given the linear nature of most of the disturbance and the relatively small amount of forest removal anticipated within the SRMZ, the residual effect of habitat loss and fragmentation on Spotted Owl is considered not significant. Spotted Owls have a very low resilience to environmental change at the landscape level, but can be tolerant of small or even moderate amounts of habitat change within their territories, providing it does not affect key areas. Much of the habitat affected by the project is currently not highly suitable and likely won‟t be for a number of years. It is unlikely that Spotted Owls would be found in close proximity to the Project, as habitat suitability is limiting. SRMZs have been set aside for the long-term management of the species. It is highly unlikely that the species will re-colonize these areas without human intervention (i.e., a reintroduction program). Operation and decommissioning are not expected to affect Spotted Owls. The analysis of residual environmental effects on Spotted Owl is summarized in Table 15-38. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Table 15-38 Cloudworks October 2011 - 724 - Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Spotted Owl (Big Silver Creek) Magnitude Extent Duration/ Frequency Reversibility Context Probability/ Likelihood Significance Confidence Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Proposed Mitigation Direction Potential Effect Residual Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Characterization Y A L L L/I I L M N M Y No Construction Habitat loss and fragmentation Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Rather than completely removing some large trees near the edge of a footprint, the possibility of creating snags by “stubbing” will be considered, providing it is safe to do so. Mature and old-growth forest will be avoided and existing disturbance corridors followed, where feasible. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 725 - Columbian Black-tailed Deer Columbian black-tailed deer may incur greater mortality from hunting and road traffic due to improvements in the road conditions, but mitigation measures applied during construction, operation, and decommissioning are expected to prevent any residual environmental effects (Table 15-39). The winter range polygons within the local study area will not be affected by the Project. Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Columbian Black-tailed Deer (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-39 Increased hunting mortality Crews will be prohibited from hunting in the area. Temporary roads and staging/spoil areas will be deactivated and planted with appropriate vegetation when no longer needed. Road deactivation will include measures designed to prevent ATV access. No No No Increased road mortality Safe speed limits along access roads will be imposed. Contractors/crews will be encouraged to use as few vehicles as possible to access work site. Wildlife observations will be recorded; Environmental Monitor will inform drivers of road sections frequented by wildlife. Temporary roads will be deactivated and re-planted with appropriate vegetation when no longer needed. Revegetation will use unpalatable regionally approved vegetation when replanting cleared roadsides where feasible, to discourage foraging. No No No Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Construction, Operation, and Decommissioning Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 726 - Grizzly Bear Due to the amount of existing anthropogenic disturbance, resident grizzly bears are unlikely to be present in the Big Silver Creek study area. Transient grizzlies might use the area occasionally but no resident bears are known in these study areas based on DNA studies (C. Apps pers. comm., June 2008). Minimal amounts of High to Moderate-rated foraging habitat (Class 1-3) overlap with the proposed facilities (5.8 ha of fall habitat, 2.6 ha of summer habitat, and <1 ha of spring habitat), and the transmission line may improve berry/forb forage opportunities in areas where suitable habitat is not currently present. Road densities will not increase measurably and the areas that are being disturbed for the facilities are designed to overlap previously-disturbed areas and other linear features on the landscape (i.e., existing roads). Potential bear interactions are still a concern, especially with black bears, and mitigation methods will be applied to prevent any residual effects associated with problem animal mortality (Table 15-40). Follow-up Required? Proposed Mitigation Cumulative Effect? Potential Effect Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Grizzly and Black Bears (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-40 No No No Construction, Operation, and Decommissioning Problem animal mortality Crews will participate in an appropriate wildlife awareness training program, and be instructed to refrain from feeding wildlife. Food scraps and garbage from construction sites will be removed or stored in bear-proof containers for proper disposal. Work crews will be prohibited from hunting and cleaning game in the Project area. Nuisance bears will be reported to a Conservation Officer, who would assist in determining appropriate measures. Human-Bear Conflict Management measures will be developed and included in the CEMP to provide clear procedures for handling bears that wander onto work sites. All road kill will be promptly moved from roadways to prevent scavenging wildlife (including bears) from being attracted to the roads. Revegetation will use unpalatable regionally approved (appropriate) vegetation when re-planting cleared roadsides where feasible, to discourage foraging. Wildlife observations will be recorded; Environmental Monitor will inform drivers of road sections frequented by wildlife. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 727 - Pacific Sideband There is limited information available about this species‟ biology. It has been observed in a number of habitat types in BC, including clear-cuts. The species was not observed within the study area during field work. Habitat loss / degradation and associated direct mortality during construction are likely the biggest concerns. However, with the implementation of mitigation measures during construction and operation (Table 15-41), and likely limited amount of suitable habitat that could be affected, residual effects are not anticipated. Decommissioning activities would be similar to construction. Effects during operation would be limited to use of herbicides. With appropriate herbicide use procedures outlined in the CEMP, no residual environmental effects are expected. Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Pacific Sideband (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-41 Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. No No No CEMP will include pest management plan with guidance for herbicide use in areas where species-at-risk may occur. No No No Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and fragmentation Operation Habitat alteration, mortality due to herbicide use Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 728 - Black Petaltail While the species was not found in the Big Silver study area, it was observed nearby in the Tretheway study area. The potential for habitat loss and degradation is likely the greatest concern during construction, but potential reproducing sites that can be readily mapped will be avoided. After the implementation of mitigation measures during construction and operation (Table 15-42), and given the likely limited amount of suitable habitat that could be affected, residual effects are not anticipated. Decommissioning activities would be similar to construction. Effects during operation would be limited to use of herbicides. With appropriate herbicide use procedures outlined in the CEMP, no residual environmental effects are expected. Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Black Petaltail (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-42 Habitat loss and fragmentation Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Sensitive ecosystems (wetlands) will be avoided during final project design to the extent feasible. Areas to be avoided will be identified and fenced off prior to construction activities, if located adjacent to the Project footprint. No No No Introduction of silt and other harmful substances BMPs will be followed for in-stream works. CEMP will include sections on managing construction waste, spill prevention, and emergency response. Equipment will be checked to ensure systems are free of leaks and in good condition. All machines working near water will have spill kit, trained operators. Erosion and sedimentation plan will be in place. No No No CEMP will include pest management plan with guidance for herbicide use in areas where species-at-risk may occur. No No No Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Construction and Decommissioning Operation Habitat alteration, mortality due to herbicide use Rare Plants Twenty plants of the Rorippa species, potentially new to science, were found scattered on a lakeshore beach, along with the Red-listed species Berula erecta and Fontinalis hypnoides. All were found approximately 60 m away from the proposed transmission line corridor on the west side of Harrison Lake. This lakeshore beach will be avoided during construction and with the implementation of mitigation measures during construction and operation, residual environmental effects are not anticipated (Table 15-43). Decommissioning activities would be similar to construction. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 729 - Rare Ecological Communities Approximately 1.7% or 29.6 ha of Moderate and High-ranked potential habitat could be affected by the Project, although no specific rare ecological communities were verified during field studies. Rare plants and sensitive habitats were documented, but these are not expected to be affected by the Project. Habitat alteration is likely the greatest threat to these sites, through changes in the composition of the plant community and the potential for invasive plants to become established. The more sensitive habitats, especially where rare plants were located, do not overlap any Project footprint. After the implementation of mitigation measures during construction and operation, residual effects are not anticipated (Table 15-43). Decommissioning activities would be similar to construction. Proposed Mitigation Follow-up Required? Potential Effect Cumulative Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Rare Plants and Rare Ecological Communities (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-43 No No See mitigation Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and direct mortality Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. If facility locations (including access roads, transmission lines, spoil areas, and laydown sites) change during the final design phase, new areas will be checked for the presence of rare plants. Rare plant communities and sensitive ecosystems known or identified during final design will be avoided and fenced off prior to construction activities, where located close to any Project footprint. Disturbance to or in special habitats (e.g., alluvial fans, lake beaches, non-forested wetlands, rock outcrops, cliffs) will be avoided to extent feasible. Natural drainage patterns will be maintained or restored. Soil rehabilitation and revegetation monitoring will be conducted. Follow-up Required? Proposed Mitigation Cumulative Effect? Potential Effect Cloudworks October 2011 - 730 - Residual Effect? Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects No No Yes; see mitigation No No See mitigation Preventing the establishment of invasive species is by far the most important step in mitigating the risk for introduction. The government of Canada currently employs inspection techniques at ports and border crossings to reduce the risk of importing many invasive insect species, and federal and provincial governments have strategies to address other points of introduction or spread on regional levels (Government of Canada 2004) Rare plant communities and sensitive ecosystems known or identified during final design will be avoided and fenced off prior to construction activities, where located close to any Project footprint. Disturbed sites will be revegetated as soon as possible after construction with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed) and monitored for revegetation success (see Section 15.2.4.2). Invasive species Introduction of silt and other harmful substances Prior to any land clearing or soil disturbance activities, a qualified individual familiar with invasive species identification will conduct a site survey to locate any occurrences of invasive species in areas potentially affected by the Project. Known occurrences of invasive species will be avoided in final facility siting/routing if feasible. Known occurrences of invasive species in or adjacent to work sites will be flagged in the field prior to construction. All construction vehicles and equipment will be thoroughly washed, paying special attention to undercarriages, wheel wells, tire treads, and tracks where mud, insect larvae, and seeds may be lodged, before their arrival to any work site or relocation from any site where invasive plants are already established. Washing areas will be located an appropriate distance away from any waterbody and riparian areas and run-off will be directed away from them. Domestic animals will be kept out of the work site whenever possible. Monitoring for invasive plants at any disturbance/reclaimed site will continue until revegetated sites are well established. Environmental Monitor will record presence of any newly established invasive species determined to be present because of construction. A professional biologist will assess any such new populations and develop an invasive plant removal strategy. CEMP will include sections on managing construction waste, spill prevention, and emergency response. Maintenance and refuelling will be conducted at an approved distance away from watercourses. Equipment will be checked to ensure systems are free of leaks and in good condition. All machines working near water will have spill kit, trained operators. Erosion and sedimentation plan will be in place. Clearing, grubbing will be minimized, especially in wet weather. Natural vegetation cover, woody debris, and organic matter will be retained when possible. Disturbed areas will be revegetated as soon as possible with regionally appropriate species. Soil rehabilitation monitoring will inform recommendations for any follow-up soil rehabilitation activities that may be necessary to ensure soil rehabilitation success. Cloudworks October 2011 Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? - 731 - Residual Effect? Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Mortality due to herbicide use CEMP will include pest management plan with guidance for herbicide use in areas where rare plants may occur. No No No Invasive species As above for construction and decommissioning. OPP will specify measures to prevent introduction and/or spread of invasive species for ongoing maintenance activities, such as control of vegetation. These measures will be informed by a review of vegetation management plans developed for transmission line corridors by BC Hydro, including Integrated Vegetation Management Plan for Distribution Line Corridors (BC Hydro, 2005), Pest Management Plan for Management of Vegetation at BC Hydro Facilities (BC Hydro, 2006), and Approved Work Practices for Managing Riparian Vegetation (BC Hydro et al., 2003). Slow-growing later-successional plants may be used to prevent invasive plant spread and reduce pruning and maintenance requirement. No No Yes; see mitigation Potential Effect Proposed Mitigation Operation Follow-up and Monitoring The need for follow-up and monitoring is summarized in the residual effects assessment summary tables in Section 15.2.4.1 above and addressed in Section 21. Cumulative Effects The cumulative effects assessment (CEA) study area encompasses those areas within which the residual environmental effects of the Project (described in Section 15.2.4.1 above) may or are likely to interact cumulatively with the effects of other past, present, and future projects and activities (Figure 4-1). Because the Shovel Creek and Tretheway Creek Waterpower Projects will be located within the same CEA study area as the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project, their potential residual environmental effects are considered together with those of the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project in the assessment below. Other projects and activities that have occurred, are occurring, or will occur within the CEA study area, and that are particularly relevant to the Big Silver CEA, are described below. (Greater detail is provided in Section 7.2 of the Keystone EA in Appendix K of this Application.) Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 732 - Past Projects and Activities Forestry has had the most impact on the landscape compared to the history of mining, fur trapping, settlement, and fishing in the area. Prior to 1960, 6,622 ha of timber had been harvested in the Tretheway, Shovel, and Big Silver CEA study area. This may be an underestimate, as logging regulations and records were not well kept before the mechanized logging era. Between 1960 and 1990, 21,466 ha of timber were removed in the Tretheway, Shovel, and Big Silver CEA study area. Between 1990 and 2002, 516 ha of timber were removed in the Tretheway, Shovel, and Big Silver CEA study area. Cumulatively, 29% of the treed area in the Tretheway, Shovel, and Big Silver CEA study area had been removed by 2002. Historical forestry (from as early as the 1940s) and associated logging camps are likely a major reason that wildlife and plants that depend on un-fragmented habitat or large old growth habitat features are rare on the landscape. The constructions of the railway, Highway 1, and numerous logging roads in the area have further fragmented the habitat and have led to additional resource extraction and access for recreational use. The recent (last 20 years) increase in recreational uses (such as hiking, camping, boating, and off-road vehicle use) around the Harrison Lake area has also contributed to the disturbance and displacement of wildlife and plant species in the area. Current Projects and Activities Almost all the current activities within the Big Silver CEA study area create disturbance and/or displacement of wildlife. The amount of human use that occurs, and the associated mortality risk, is likely the main reason grizzly bears are threatened within the Stein-Nahatlatch and Garibaldi-Pitt GBPUs. Most human activities are concentrated in the summer months, although recreational activities in the area are expected from May to October (or longer) depending on weather and road conditions. Recreation The Big Silver LU receives low to moderate levels of public recreation due to its location (George et al. 2005b). Recreation activities involve hiking, sightseeing, fishing, hunting, and 4x4 driving. Winter use is restricted by road deactivation, although some snowmobiling occurs in the area (George et al. 2005b). East Harrison LU receives moderate to heavy public recreation use from spring to fall (George et al. 2005c). Winter recreation off the main East Harrison FSR is restricted by seasonal road deactivations (George et al. 2005c). The Tretheway LU receives low recreation due to the rugged road and remote location (George et al. 2005a). There are few recreation sites in the Tretheway LU so activities are mostly limited to 4-wheel drive and ATV use, hunting and wildlife viewing (George et al. 2005a). The Harrison Lake area is heavily used by ATV and dirt bike riders. Erosion/vegetation damage (especially in riparian areas), wildlife disturbance, and potential contamination from fuel or fluids leaks may occur in areas of concentrated use. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 733 - Boating Harrison Lake is used mostly by powerboats but also by canoeists/kayakers in sheltered areas. Harrison Yacht Club operates the Long Island Bay recreation site and has docks available for larger boats. Small boats are permitted on Weaver Lake and Twenty Mile Bay. Non-motorized boats are allowed on Wood Lake. There is small boat activity at Sunrise Lake. In Sasquatch Provincial Park, boating is permitted on Deer and Hicks Lakes but motorboats are restricted on Hicks Lake. Trout Lake is the smallest lake in the park and is the easiest to paddle. Smaller boats are permitted at Rainbow Falls. The lower 3 km of Cogburn Creek is rated as a Class 3 or 4 route and is used by whitewater paddlers. There is also an expert section of Cogburn Creek that is used by whitewater paddlers (Schwab 2007). The lower portion of Big Silver Creek is suitable for novice paddlers with a couple of Class 2 features. Access is west of the junction of Harrison East/Clear Creek roads and the take-out is south of the Silver River logging camp on Harrison Lake (Mussio et al. 2003). The middle section of Big Silver Creek is rated as intermediate/advanced paddling, and several sections upstream are paddled by advanced/expert paddlers (Schwab 2007). Recreational boating can have effects associated with the introduction of harmful substances if there are fuel leaks or spills; disturbance to nesting birds if there are loud noises or boaters get too close to active nests; invasive species; and problem animal mortality. If boating is associated with camping then additional impacts can occur (see below). Cabins and Camping Weekend campers frequent both sides of Harrison Lake during the summer months, gaining access to camping areas by boat and vehicle (along the various logging roads). There are at least 19 recreational sites used for camping (and other motorized and non-motorized recreational activities) in the Tretheway/Big Silver/Shovel CEA study area. Some are open year-round, while others are seasonally used. A common effect associated with camping is the accumulation of garbage and poor containment of food and food scraps. This can often lead to problem animal mortality, especially bears that are attracted to the areas. Local habitat degradation (notably cutting for firewood), the introduction of harmful chemicals, and the introduction of invasive species are also a concern. Additional Recreational Opportunities Additional recreational opportunities in the CEA study area include the Hemlock Valley Ski Resort, located in the West Harrison LU, which has 121 ha of skiable terrain and 13 km of cross-country trails, and accommodates about 1,500 to 2,000 day guests per day during the ski season. Big Boar Outfitters has a guiding territory that includes the Chehalis, East Harrison, West Harrison, Big Silver, and Tretheway LUs. Approximately 35 hunters are guided during April to mid-June to hunt in the Chehalis to the Pemberton area (A. Dougan pers. comm.). Access is primarily by truck, ATV, or by foot. Approximately 30-50 black bears are harvested every year during the two to three month period (A. Dougan pers. comm.). Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 734 - Cloudworks October 2011 Power Generation and Transmission Lakeside Pacific Forest Products Ltd. has one work camp at Cogburn Creek that produces power from five separate diversion points at Graham, Derek, Ronald, North Ronald, and Ivan Creeks. A maximum diversion amount of 1,500 gallons per day for work camps and 2 cubic feet per second for power production is licenced on the creeks. There are residential water licences registered to Jenner Creek near Sasquatch Provincial Park, to Connor Creek, and to Drift Bold Creek (near Morris Creek). The Lower Lillooet Project consists of three run-of-river projects on Douglas, Lower Fire, and Stokke Creeks. Stokke is the only project that falls within the CEA study area. It has a 22 MW capacity and is connected to the other Lower Lillooet Projects by a 138 kV transmission line. The Upper Harrison Water Power Project, currently under construction, consists of three run-of-river projects, though only one (Tipella) occurs within the CEA study area. The Tipella Creek project footprint removed approximately 18 ha of suitable habitat for Western Screech-owl, Spotted Owl, grizzly bear spring and fall feeding habitat, and deer feeding habitat (Hamilton and Associates 2006). The transmission line at Tipella parallels a 360 kV BC Hydro transmission line (3L2), which runs along the west side of Harrison Lake to an interconnection site near Agassiz. This 360 kV line provides opportunities for the introduction and spread of invasive plants within the study area, although BC Hydro does work with the various plant councils to monitor and remove some of the more aggressive noxious weeds. Forestry Forestry has the most direct and largest effect on habitat removal and fragmentation in the area, with an AAC for the Fraser TSA of 1.27 million cubic metres a year (Pederson 2004). Within the Big Silver LU, 18,819 ha of forest are within the THLB (George et al. 2005b). Forty-two (42) percent of the forested land base in the Big Silver LU is not over sixty years of age (George et al. 2005b). Forty-three (43) percent of the forested land base within the East Harrison LU is aged zero to sixty years old (George et al. 2005c). Within the West Harrison LU, 19,563 ha of Crown forest are within the THLB (George et al. 2005d). Sixty-one (61) percent of the forested landbase in the West Harrison LU is not more than sixty years old (George et al. 2005d). Within the Crown forested land base for the Tretheway LU, 7,392 ha are within the THLB (George et al. 2005a). Forestry operations may have environmental effects similar to those of the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project. Forestry activities follow a number of guidelines to address management for species that are rare on the landscape or are of regional concern. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 735 - Cloudworks October 2011 Settlements The Hemlock Valley settlement (on the west side of Harrison Lake) includes 26 full-time residents and 800-1000 seasonal residents during the winter. It is a resort town but has access to fire services and underground utilities. This settlement will interact with local wildlife. Issues associated with habitat fragmentation, introduction of harmful substances, nest loss, invasive species, and animal mortality are all of concern. Transportation and Infrastructure The West Harrison FSR runs along the west side of Harrison Lake and the East Harrison FSR runs along the east side of Harrison Lake. Both are heavily used for recreational access. The extensive road network provides opportunities for the introduction and spread of invasive plants. Forestry roads fragment habitat throughout the study area and continued use of these by motorcycles, ATVs, and other off-road vehicles can result in soil erosion and minor chemical spills (fuel and lubrication leaks). Roads also allow access for illegal hunting and risk of mortality due to vehicular collision. First Nations Use The Big Silver LU is located within the asserted traditional territory of the Chehalis Band and the Sto:lo, In-SHUCK-ch, and Nlaka‟pamux First Nations (George et al. 2005b). The East Harrison LU is located within the asserted traditional territories of the Sto:lo, Chehalis, and Yale First Nations (George et al. 2005c). The Chehalis Indian Band has indicated that two transformer sites and a village are located between the Big Silver transmission line and Doctors Point (Golder 2009). Shovel Creek and Big Silver Creek are both traditional trap line areas and travel corridors for the In-SHUCK-ch Nation (Golder 2009). The Big Silver transmission line crosses through areas that have been or are used for fishing, habitation, spiritual sites, trap lines, travel corridors, gathering areas, hunting areas, and fishing areas (Golder 2009). The Big Silver Creek transmission line route was used by the Sto:lo First Nation for hunting and has cultural landscape features, potential archaeological sites, and trails (Golder 2009). The Tretheway LU is located within the asserted traditional territories of the Sto:lo, Chehalis, and InSHUCK-Ch First Nations (George et al. 2005a). The Chehalis Indian Band has indicated that, between Tretheway Creek and Tipella Creek, there may be a village or transformer site and several camps along the shoreline (Golder 2009). The In-SHUCK-ch Nation has indicated that Tretheway Creek is a traditional place for fishing, trap lines, hunting, and gathering (Golder 2009). The Sto:lo First Nation traditional used Tretheway Creek for fishing and hunting (Golder 2009). Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 736 - Cloudworks October 2011 Future or Proposed Projects and Activities As population increases, the land around the Lower Mainland will incur more urban and suburban sprawl, and transportation corridors will expand (BC MOE 2007b). This will likely result in increased pressure for industrial and residential development and increased recreational use in the surrounding areas. There will likely be greater conflicts between industrial needs and the preservation of the viewshed from the south end of the lake. Much of the forested area has been previously logged, although logging continues in much of the area, albeit scaled down from a decade or so ago. Forestry will continue to occur but its intensity, location, and frequency will depend on timber prices, access, technology, and constraints. Sea to Sea Jeep Tours has proposed using the East and West Harrison FSR to run recreational tours in the Harrison Lake area (ILMB 2009). An application to ILMB was submitted in 2003 and is currently under review (ILMB 2009). Tamihi Logging Company has applied to use an area at the near the confluence of Big Silver Creek and Harrison Lake for log handling and storage (ILMB 2009). There is an application to the ILMB filed May 7, 2009 by Southview Sorting Ltd. to establish a 14 ha sand and gravel quarry site near the confluence of Bear and Cogburn Creek (ILMB 2009). E.J. Fryer submitted an application to the ILMB to quarry rip rap from a nine ha area north of Rainbow Falls on April 7, 2008, which is currently under review (ILMB 2009). The status of these applications remains uncertain. There are a number of proponents that have applied for water licences to produce power on creeks on both sides of Harrison Lake. However, none of these projects have approvals to proceed or Electricity Purchase Agreements with BC Hydro, and were therefore not included in the CEA. The proposed BC Hydro Interior-Lower Mainland (ILM) Transmission Project has received an Environmental Assessment Certificate. It proposes a new 250 km 500 kV transmission line from the Merritt area to Coquitlam BC, with the majority of the route running along existing rights-of-way, paralleling BC Hydro‟s 500 kV transmission line (5L82) within the CEA study area. The ILM project will remove forested habitat where it passes through the study area, including some suitable habitat for Spotted Owl and Northern Goshawk. The ILM project will use the existing 500 kV transmission right-ofway as much as possible, thereby minimizing potential disturbance to new areas. However, the current right-of-way will become wider with the addition of the new line, potentially acting as a barrier to movement and dispersal for some species. Project construction is expected to start in the near future, with right-of-way preparation (e.g., tree falling) likely being the biggest disturbance. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 737 - Leader Mining International Ltd. has conducted pre-drilling tests and a feasibility study for a magnesium project located on the west slopes of Talc Creek near its headwaters. The deposit is of large size with high magnesium grade, low impurity, favourable metallurgy, and proximity to infrastructure. The project will have a production capacity of greater than 75,000 tonnes per year of mineral ore. The magnesium processing plant would be located between Mahood and Ruby Creeks. The project will require groundwater extraction at a rate greater than 75 litres per second. The project is at the pre-application stage with the BC Environmental Assessment Office; the proponent has requested to hold this project until after 2010. One of the major limiting factors of the proposed magnesium mine was obtaining power to run the onsite processing plant. It is uncertain if the project will re-enter the assessment process. As noted earlier, because the Shovel Creek and Tretheway Creek Waterpower Projects will be located within the same CEA study area as the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project, their potential residual environmental effects are considered together with those of the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project in the assessment below. Determination of Cumulative Environmental Effects Other types of projects and activities likely to interact with the residual environmental effects of the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project are summarized in Table 15-44. Pacific tailed frog Introduction of silt and other harmful substances First Nations Use Transportation Removal of suitable habitat Settlements Residual Environmental Effect of the Project Forestry Valued Environmental Component Power Generation and Transmission Assessment of Potential Interactions between Other Projects and Activities and Project Residual Environmental Effects within the Big Silver CEA Study Area Recreation Table 15-44 Direct mortality Northern Goshawk Removal of suitable nesting habitat Spotted Owl Removal of suitable nesting habitat Band-tailed Pigeon Removal of suitable habitat The specific projects and activities within these general categories that would most likely interact with the residual environmental effects of the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project include forestry (past, present, and future) and the ILM transmission line (future). While some recreational activities (boating and camping) likely are the cause for some incidences of introduction of harmful substances to the Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 738 - Cloudworks October 2011 environment, they would mostly occur in habitats removed from tailed frogs. The ILM transmission line and forestry operations will remove suitable habitat for a number of species but mitigation measures and work practices are in place to avoid impacts when working around riparian areas, thereby minimizing some of the potential for adverse effects to tailed frogs. Pacific Tailed Frog Cumulatively, the effects on Pacific tailed frog within the Big Silver CEA study area include direct habitat loss and fragmentation and possible mortality due to multiple land uses on the environment. Past and continuing effects associated with logging (including transmission line clearing) and off-road vehicle use include stream exposure, siltation of the stream, and habitat loss. In addition, run-off from roads and improper culvert installation can reduce movement and stream productivity. While these past and present activities have likely played a significant part on the suspected decline of the species, recent initiatives (Riparian Areas Regulation and riparian setbacks for fisheries requirements) have offered greater protection for riparian areas. Additional protection has come through the establishment of parks, management areas, and buffered no-work zones around riparian areas. Due to past activities and continuing possible effects, the cumulative effect without the Project is considered significant. As described previously, the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project will remove some habitat within the diversion reach and may also result in mortality of some tadpoles during dewatering for construction. Some riparian habitat will be permanently removed for construction of the facilities. However, temporarily disturbed habitats will be restored, reducing the habitat loss. The potential residual environmental effects of the Shovel Creek and Tretheway Creek Waterpower Projects are similar. Given the very limited scale of the Projects‟ residual environmental effects in comparison to the extant effects of other projects and activities, the contribution of these Projects to cumulative effects is considered to be not significant, and the Projects are not expected to substantively alter the cumulative effects already observed. Table 15-45 summarizes the assessment of potential cumulative environmental effects on Pacific tailed frog. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Table 15-45 Evaluation Criteria Cloudworks October 2011 - 739 - Pacific Tailed Frog Cumulative Effects Analysis for Big Silver CEA Study Area Cumulative Effects without Tretheway, Big Silver, and Shovel Projects Tretheway, Big Silver, and Shovel Projects Contribution to Cumulative Effects Comments Amount of habitat removal due to the Project is very low compared to the amount that is currently available in the CEA study area. Except for work in the creek itself, much of the development will occur alongside existing disturbance (roads and cut-blocks) and through areas that will be disturbed again in the future by other projects and activities. Magnitude Moderate Negligible Geographic Extent Regional Sub-local Duration and Frequency Short-term and Frequent Long-term and Infrequent The removal of some suitable habitat will last the life of the Project, which is longer than for timber harvest, as the area is allowed to regenerate. The removal of suitable habitat will occur once for the Project. Reversibility Short-term to Long-term Long-term Some Project residual effects will last until the Project is decommissioned. Low Low The species is not very resilient to habitat changes. Significance Significant Not significant Past activities likely had a significant cumulative effect, although new initiatives are providing species protection. The contribution of the Project will not be significant. Confidence High High Context Northern Goshawk Cumulatively, effects on Northern Goshawk in the Big Silver CEA study area include direct habitat loss and fragmentation due to multiple land uses on the environment. The largest impact on Northern Goshawk nesting habitat is logging. Nearly one third of the CEA boundary has been logged within the past 100 years, and much of this historically logged landscape will be harvested again. Other factors affecting habitat loss include various linear features such as FSRs and transmission lines that fragment the area. These other land uses, mainly forestry, have already had a significant adverse effect on suitable Northern Goshawk habitat. As described previously, the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project will remove relatively small amounts of suitable habitat during construction of the proposed facilities. Project facilities, notably the proposed transmission line, follow other linear corridors, where possible, and overlap previously disturbed areas that are likely to be disturbed (harvested) again in the future. The transmission line alignment avoids a number of constrained areas. Much of the forested habitat along the proposed transmission line is vulnerable to future harvesting regardless if the Project goes ahead. The potential residual environmental effects of the Shovel Creek and Tretheway Creek Waterpower Projects are similar. The contribution of these Projects to cumulative effects is not considered significant, especially in comparison to the extant effects of other projects and activities, and the Projects are not expected to substantively alter the cumulative effects already observed. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 740 - Management recommendations for the Red-listed sub-species in the Chilliwack Forest District assume the sub-species occurs in the Project area based on the biogeoclimatic zones that are present, but its occurrence has not been confirmed. If the Red-listed sub-species is confirmed to occur in the Project area, additional future management measures may be imposed. Local Spotted Owl habitat management (and likely DWR management) may be sufficient to manage goshawks in the region, as these species appear to share many similar habitat attributes. Table 15-46 summarizes the assessment of potential cumulative environmental effects on Northern Goshawk. Table 15-46 Evaluation Criteria Northern Goshawk Cumulative Effects Analysis for Big Silver CEA Study Area Cumulative Effects without Tretheway, Big Silver, and Shovel Projects Tretheway, Big Silver, and Shovel Projects Contribution to Cumulative Effects Comments Magnitude High Low Amount of habitat removal due to the Projects is low compared to the amount that is currently removed in the CEA study area. Much of the development will occur alongside existing disturbance (roads and cutblocks) and through areas that will be disturbed again in the future. Geographic Extent Regional Regional The removal of habitat by the three Projects combined may affect Northern Goshawks regionally. Duration and Frequency Long-term and Frequent Long-term and Infrequent Reversibility Long-term Long-term Low Low Context The removal of suitable nesting habitat will last the life of the Projects, which is longer than for timber harvest, as the area is allowed to regenerate. The Projects will remove suitable habitat once. This species has low resilience to environmental change. Significance Significant Not significant Other land uses, mainly forestry, have already had a significant impact on suitable Northern Goshawk habitat. The contribution of the Project to cumulative effects will not be significant. Confidence Moderate Moderate The occurrence of the Red-listed sub-species within the study area has not been confirmed. Spotted Owl The Spotted Owl population has been severely diminished due to timber harvest and other land clearing activities, inter-specific competition, and habitat fragmentation and alteration from other land uses. Almost one third of the CEA study area has been logged within the past 100 years and much of this historically logged landscape will be harvested again. To address the existing cumulative effect, the Province has created SRMZs to manage the species. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 741 - Project facilities, notably the proposed transmission line, follow existing linear corridors where possible, and overlap previously disturbed areas that are likely to be disturbed (harvested) again in the future. A number of constrained areas (including the Sasquatch SRMZ) were avoided during transmission line alignment. The Tretheway Creek and Big Silver Creek Waterpower Projects will together remove 10.1 ha of High-rated habitat and 6.6 ha of Moderate-rated habitat. About 40 ha, most of which is currently unsuitable as breeding habitat, will be permanently removed within the SRMZ. However, while the SMRZ in the Tretheway area may become important for the Spotted Owl in the future, its purpose in the new SOMP is in fact to allow for more timber harvesting possibilities as a trade-off for greater habitat protection for areas adjacent to the Fraser River (BC MOE 2009). The area affected accounts for about one percent of one LTAC and is not considered to be significant (particularly when compared to the existing disturbance on the landscape). Given the very limited scale of the Projects‟ residual environmental effects in comparison to the extant effects of other projects and activities, the contribution of these Projects to cumulative effects is considered to be not significant, and the Projects are not expected to substantively alter the cumulative effects already observed. Table 15-47 summarizes the assessment of cumulative environmental effects on Spotted Owl. Table 15-47 Evaluation Criteria Magnitude Geographic Extent Spotted Owl Cumulative Effects Analysis for the Big Silver CEA Study Area Cumulative Effects without Tretheway and Big Silver Projects High Regional Tretheway and Big Silver Projects Contribution to Cumulative Effects Negligible Amount of habitat removal due to the Tretheway Creek and Big Silver Creek Waterpower Projects is very low compared to the amount that is currently removed in the CEA study area. Much of the development will occur alongside existing disturbance (roads and cut-blocks) and through areas that will be disturbed again in the future. Regional Given the length of the transmission line and footprints on both sides of Harrison Lake the removal of habitat by the Projects could affect Spotted Owls on a regional extent (over the life of the project). The removal of suitable nesting habitat will last the life of the Projects, which is longer than for timber harvest, as harvested areas are allowed to regenerate to forest (but not, perhaps, to old-growth). The Projects will remove suitable habitat once. Duration and Frequency Long-term and Frequent Long-term and Infrequent Reversibility Long-term Long-term Low Low Context Comments Significance Significant Not significant Confidence High High This species has low resilience to environmental change. Other land uses, mainly forestry, have already had a significant impact on suitable habitat for the species. The contribution of the Projects to cumulative effects will not be significant. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 742 - Band-tailed Pigeon Cumulatively, effects on Band-tailed Pigeons within the Big Silver CEA study area include direct habitat loss and fragmentation due to multiple land uses. Almost one third of the CEA study area has been logged within the past 100 years and much of this historically logged landscape will be harvested again. Breeding Bird Survey data indicate that the range of the species in BC may be expanding; however, the total number of birds has been decreasing since 1966 at an average annual rate of 2.8% across North America (Keppie and Braun 2000; BC CDC 2008). Loss and degradation of suitable breeding habitat is considered a significant threat to the Band-tailed Pigeon (Braun 1994). Within the study area, historic logging has likely resulted in an increase in present-day habitat availability, given that stands harvested 40-60 years ago are currently at the most suitable age for Band-tailed Pigeon. The proposed transmission line could offer good forage opportunities as the openings will promote the growth of fruit and flower-producing shrubs. Given this potentially positive effect, together with the limited scale of the Projects‟ residual environmental effects in comparison to the extant and ongoing effects of other projects and activities, the contribution of these Projects to cumulative effects is considered to be not significant, and the Projects are not expected to substantively alter the cumulative effects already observed. Forestry will continue to have a larger effect on the species. Table 15-48 summarizes the assessment of cumulative environmental effects on Band-tailed Pigeon. Table 15-48 Band-tailed Pigeon Cumulative Effects Analysis for the Big Silver CEA Study Area Cumulative Effects without Tretheway, Big Silver, and Shovel Projects Tretheway, Big Silver, and Shovel Projects Contribution to Cumulative Effects Comments Magnitude High Negligible Amount of habitat removal due to the Projects is very low compared to the amount that is currently available in the CEA study area. Geographic Extent Regional Local Duration and Frequency Long-term and Frequent Long-term and Infrequent Reversibility Long-term Long-term Evaluation Criteria Context Moderate High The removal of suitable habitat will last the life of the Projects, which is longer than for timber harvest, as the area is allowed to regenerate. The Projects will remove suitable habitat once. Regional habitat degradation to unsuitable younger stands can be difficult for the species; however, smaller openings (i.e., managed rights-of-way) can provide good forage opportunities. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Evaluation Criteria Significance Confidence Cumulative Effects without Tretheway, Big Silver, and Shovel Projects Significant Cloudworks October 2011 - 743 - Tretheway, Big Silver, and Shovel Projects Contribution to Cumulative Effects Comments Not significant The species has already been significantly affected by past activities. Historic logging may have increased habitat availability in the CEA study area. The contribution of the Projects to cumulative effects will not be significant. Moderate High The extent of recruitment of suitable nesting habitat due to historic logging is uncertain; therefore, the confidence in the ranking of the cumulative effect of other activities (without the Projects) is moderate. 15.2.4.2 Timber Resources As noted in Section 15.2.4.1, the proposed facilities and associated transmission line lie within the Big Silver and Tretheway LUs in the Chilliwack Forest District, portions of which are considered to be part of the Timber Harvesting Land Base (THLB). The potential impact of the Project on the THLB has been assessed by estimating the area and timber type that will be cleared during Project construction. Because the Shovel Creek and Big Silver Creek Waterpower Projects are located in the same LU and will share some infrastructure, some of the information presented below pertains to both projects. Note also that a portion of the transmission line associated with the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project (i.e., that portion of the transmission line on the west side of Harrison Lake) is located within the Tretheway LU; because the THLB is calculated by LU, the assessment of the effects of clearing associated with that portion of the Big Silver transmission line is included in the assessment of the Tretheway Creek Waterpower Project in Section 5.2.4.2. Existing Environmental Conditions Section 15.2.4.1 provides an overview description of the environmental setting of the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project. To facilitate the assessment of potential environmental effects on the THLB, forest age classes have been mapped (see Maps B01 to B10 in Appendix B of the Hedberg EA in Appendix R of this Application). These age classes include: young plantations 0 - 15 yrs; free growing plantations 15 - 30 yrs; immature forest 30 - 60 yrs; and forest available for harvest 60+ yrs. Existing forest licence tenures and cutblocks are also shown, relative to the extent of clearing associated with Project facilities. The location of OGMAs and forest reserves relative to Project facilities is shown in Appendix A of the Hedberg EA in Appendix R of this Application. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 744 - Cloudworks October 2011 Potential Environmental Effects Project construction will require the clearing of merchantable forest and of areas that are occupied by immature or un-merchantable stands. Permanent clearing (i.e., areas that will not be revegetated after Project construction) reduces the extent of the THLB. The total area of THLB within each LU and across all LUs within a regional Timber Supply Area (TSA) contributes to the Annual Allowable Cut (AAC) calculation for each TSA. Thus, a significant reduction to the THLB could result in a decrease to the AAC within the TSA, and thus has the potential to impact LU-level timber supply and individual licensees‟ levels of cut. In addition, the THLB could be reduced by an accidental wildfire during Project construction or operation. Estimate of Area Required for Harvest and Clearing Based on clearing area information obtained from “as-built” surveys of similar run-of-river projects located around Harrison Lake, the average clearing widths for the various Project components has been determined. The average area of clearing that is required for the installation of the intake and powerhouse structure has been determined to be 1.0 ha. This includes clearing for the structures, associated parking and storage areas, and clearing for the headpond and tailrace. The average width of clearing that is required for installation of the penstock has been determined to be 50 m. This width is inclusive of adjacent roads and other areas of permanent clearing required for component construction and operation, as well as areas required for temporary clearing that will be used for equipment movement and access, and aggregate borrow, spoil, and laydown areas during construction. The average width of clearing that is required for installation of the transmission line has been determined to be 30m. This width is inclusive of adjacent roads and other areas of permanent clearing required for component construction and operation. Using these average clearing widths, the extent of clearing for Project components, including the headpond, intake, powerhouse, penstock, transmission line, access roads, and additional construction use areas (borrow, spoil, and laydown), has been estimated (Table 15-49). Note that these estimates include both the Shovel Creek and Big Silver Creek Waterpower Projects. However, the clearing associated with that portion of the Big Silver transmission line located on the west side of Harrison Lake (i.e., in the Tretheway LU) is not included here, but is assessed in Section 5.2.4.2 together with the effects of the Tretheway Creek Waterpower Project. The final locations of aggregate borrow, spoil, and laydown areas will be determined by site-specific conditions and will not be defined until construction is underway. Construction logistics, engineered cut and fill specifications, aggregate grade availability and needs, and the economics of site utilization at the time of construction will all play a role in the final location of temporary construction areas. However, it is expected, based on experience with similar projects, that aggregate borrow, spoil, and laydown areas will be located close to project infrastructure components. Therefore, to accommodate the uncertainty in Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 745 - location of aggregate borrow, spoil, and laydown areas, the estimated extent of the area to be cleared for the Project includes a buffer around project components. Thus, while the spatial distribution of clearing may shift from the distribution shown in the mapping (Maps B01 to B10 in Appendix B of the Hedberg EA, included in Appendix R of this Application), the total extent of Project clearing will not exceed the area estimated below. Further, identified constraints will be avoided during final siting of aggregate borrow, spoil, and laydown areas. The extent of clearing for Project components was estimated for each forest cover age class. Finally, the analysis also identifies the total impact of expected Project clearing, as a percentage of the 31 THLB within the Big Silver LU (as identified in the LU Plan) . Headpond Clearing (ha) Penstock Clearing (ha) Proposed Road (ha) Structure (ha) Tx Line (ha) Total Clearing Required (ha) <15 0 0.8 0 0 0 0.8 15 - 30 0 0 0 0.2 0.6 0.8 30 - 60 1.6 5.4 0.1 1.0 43.1 51.2 > 60 0.9 8.7 0.9 2.2 6.5 19.2 0 0 0 0 0.3 0.3 2.5 14.9 1 3.4 50.5 72.3 Forest Age (years) Non-forest Total Landscape Unit Operable Area Impacted (%) Estimated Extent of Timber Clearing in the Big Silver LU for the Shovel Creek and Big Silver Creek Waterpower Projects Total Operable Area in Landscape Unit (ha) Table 15-49 18,819 0.4 Mitigation Mitigation strategies to minimize the extent of productive timber areas affected by Project clearing or accidental wildfire are presented below. Revegetation Areas that are not occupied by Project structures and not required to remain cleared for safety and access purposes (i.e., transmission line rights-of-way) will be revegetated after construction. A qualified professional will oversee all revegetation planning and activities. 31 The THLB for each LU includes stands across all age classes that fall within areas that are considered productive in terms of the ability to grow merchantable timber and are not constrained from harvesting due to regulatory or geographic limitations. Productive and operable forest areas that are considered constrained through land use planning designations have been removed from THLB accounting. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 746 - Cloudworks October 2011 The project CEMP will include BMPs for site evaluation, clearing, soil conservation, and rehabilitation to ensure opportunities for successful revegetation are maximized. Mitigation measures to conserve and rehabilitate soil resources during and after construction are described in Section 15.2.1.3. After soil rehabilitation is complete, where possible (i.e., depending on site conditions), revegetation will include planting of ecologically suitable tree and understory species, as well as seeding of suitable areas with herb, shrub, and grass species to promote the development of ecologically appropriate ground cover. Measures to prevent the introduction of non-native and invasive plant species are identified in Table 15-43 (in relation to rare plants and rare ecological communities). Revegetated areas are expected to return to the THLB within the LU. Some areas affected by construction activities will not be amenable to revegetation. These areas typically include road cut and fill slopes and/or areas that contain high levels of rock and other materials that are unsuitable for the growth of vegetation. These areas, in addition to the permanently cleared areas occupied by Project facilities, will remain as permanent losses to the THLB within the LU. However, through good planning and development of BMPs (in the CEMP), which provide criteria for the evaluation of suitable areas prior to clearing and detail procedures to be followed during clearing to maximize revegetation opportunities, the area of permanent clearing will be minimized. Revegetation Planning During construction, a qualified professional will identify areas suitable for revegetation and develop appropriate site-specific revegetation objectives and prescriptions consistent with the soil rehabilitation measures described in Section 15.2.1.3. Revegetation prescriptions will include a description of site conditions and geographic location, and all revegetation sites will be classified pursuant to the BC Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem Classification (BEC) system. This system identifies the site by the mix of vegetation, soils, topography, and climate associated with the site and provides the ecological basis for all revegetation planning throughout the Province. The site description and identification of the site-level BEC classification will guide planners in identifying and prescribing appropriate species mixes at appropriate densities. Revegetation Activities Tree species selected for revegetation will be appropriate for the site conditions and tree seedlings used will be consistent with the BC Chief Foresters‟ Standards for Seed Use. These standards define limits to seed use with respect to distance from area of seed origin and limits to movement above or below the elevation of origin. Planting and seeding will be performed using both manual and mechanical means, as appropriate for revegetation objectives. The revegetation plan will detail the preferred microsite requirements for the planting of individual tree and regionally approved plant species. A qualified individual will monitor revegetation activities, to ensure the standards detailed in the revegetation prescription are achieved. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 747 - Cloudworks October 2011 Revegetation Monitoring Revegetation monitoring will be completed at the end of the first growing season following revegetation activities. The Long-Term Monitoring Plan (LTMP) for the Project (see Section 21) will provide the methodology and reporting requirements for the assessment of revegetation success. The results of the revegetation monitoring program will inform recommendations for replanting or other vegetation management activities that may be necessary to ensure revegetation success. Wildfire Management The construction and operation of the Project will occur within provincial Crown forest areas. The Wildfire Act requires all industrial activities adjacent to forested areas to abide by the Act and associated regulations. In order to reduce the potential for wildfire events, a comprehensive project Fire Abatement Plan (FAP), consistent with the requirements of the Wildfire Act, will be developed for the construction and operation phases of the Project. This plan will outline procedures and activity protocols to reduce both the potential for accidental wildfire to occur and the potential extent and impact of accidental wildfire, if one were to occur. The FAP will address wildfire awareness, risk assessment, risk monitoring, activity protocols, fire equipment, worker training, and wildfire suppression. The development of the FAP will require a complete Project site assessment prior to construction start-up. This assessment will stratify the Project area into wildfire risk categories based on the ecological site classification and on the pre-construction site conditions with respect to fuel loading and topography. Additionally, the assessment will identify the construction activities expected to occur within each area and classify each expected activity with respect to wildfire ignition risk. This information will be used to develop Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for each expected activity, based on the risk categories developed for the site and activity classification combinations. The FAP will also detail the procedures that will be in place during construction to ensure daily fire risk levels are monitored and current risk and activity restrictions are effectively communicated. The FAP will outline requirements for worker training in fire prevention behaviour and wildfire suppression. Finally, the FAP will provide a detailed wildfire response plan. This portion of the FAP will identify the location of fire-fighting resources such as water sources, helicopter landings, access roads, and natural fire breaks. Additionally, this portion of the FAP will provide detailed requirements for fire-fighting equipment that will be present and maintained on site during construction and operation. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 748 - Residual Environmental Effects Assessment The Project will be located mainly in forested areas that have previously been disturbed by historic timber harvesting activities. The previously harvested areas are reforested and have or are developing the attributes of natural forest stands. Change to forest stand structure is a natural process over time and forested ecosystems are resilient to site level changes in stand structure. Only 0.4% of the total THLB within the Big Silver LU will be cleared for the Shovel Creek and Big Silver Creek Waterpower Projects. The total area planned for clearing by all Three Proposed Projects is less than 0.1% of the total THLB within the Fraser TSA. As temporarily cleared areas are revegetated and returned to a productive state (expected within the first ten years of Project operation), the loss to the THLB will be further reduced. However, areas cleared to accommodate permanent Project facilities represent a loss to the THLB, and a residual environmental effect from construction is therefore predicted but is considered to be not significant. Decommissioning of Project facilities may return additional lands to the THLB. Implementation of the FPP will render an accidental wildfire unlikely. If a fire were to occur, implementation of the FPP is expected to eliminate any residual environmental effects due to accidental wildlife during all phases of the Project. The analysis of the residual environmental effects of timber harvest and land clearing activities is summarized in Table 15-50. Proposed Mitigation Follow-up Required? Potential Effect Cumulative Effect? Residual Environmental Effects Summary, Rare Plants and Rare Ecological Communities (Big Silver Creek) Residual Effect? Table 15-50 No No See mitigation Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and direct mortality Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. If facility locations (including access roads, transmission lines, spoil areas, and laydown sites) change during the final design phase, new areas will be checked for the presence of rare plants. Rare plant communities and sensitive ecosystems known or identified during final design will be avoided and fenced off prior to construction activities, where located close to any Project footprint. Disturbance to or in special habitats (e.g., alluvial fans, lake beaches, non-forested wetlands, rock outcrops, cliffs) will be avoided to extent feasible. Natural drainage patterns will be maintained or restored. Soil rehabilitation and revegetation monitoring will be conducted. Follow-up Required? Proposed Mitigation Cumulative Effect? Potential Effect Cloudworks October 2011 - 749 - Residual Effect? Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects No No Yes; see mitigation Preventing the establishment of invasive species is by far the most important step in mitigating the risk for introduction. The government of Canada currently employs inspection techniques at ports and border crossings to reduce the risk of importing many invasive insect species, and federal and provincial governments have strategies to address other points of introduction or spread on regional levels (Government of Canada 2004) Rare plant communities and sensitive ecosystems known or identified during final design will be avoided and fenced off prior to construction activities, where located close to any Project footprint. Disturbed sites will be revegetated as soon as possible after construction with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed) and monitored for revegetation success (see Section 15.2.4.2). Invasive species Prior to any land clearing or soil disturbance activities, a qualified individual familiar with invasive species identification will conduct a site survey to locate any occurrences of invasive species in areas potentially affected by the Project. Known occurrences of invasive species will be avoided in final facility siting/routing if feasible. Known occurrences of invasive species in or adjacent to work sites will be flagged in the field prior to construction. All construction vehicles and equipment will be thoroughly washed, paying special attention to undercarriages, wheel wells, tire treads, and tracks where mud, insect larvae, and seeds may be lodged, before their arrival to any work site or relocation from any site where invasive plants are already established. Washing areas will be located an appropriate distance away from any waterbody and riparian areas and run-off will be directed away from them. Domestic animals will be kept out of the work site whenever possible. Monitoring for invasive plants at any disturbance/reclaimed site will continue until revegetated sites are well established. Environmental Monitor will record presence of any newly established invasive species determined to be present because of construction. A professional biologist will assess any such new populations and develop an invasive plant removal strategy. Cloudworks October 2011 Cumulative Effect? Follow-up Required? - 750 - Residual Effect? Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects CEMP will include sections on managing construction waste, spill prevention, and emergency response. Maintenance and refuelling will be conducted at an approved distance away from watercourses. Equipment will be checked to ensure systems are free of leaks and in good condition. All machines working near water will have spill kit, trained operators. Erosion and sedimentation plan will be in place. Clearing, grubbing will be minimized, especially in wet weather. Natural vegetation cover, woody debris, and organic matter will be retained when possible. Disturbed areas will be revegetated as soon as possible with regionally appropriate species. Soil rehabilitation monitoring will inform recommendations for any follow-up soil rehabilitation activities that may be necessary to ensure soil rehabilitation success. No No See mitigation Mortality due to herbicide use CEMP will include pest management plan with guidance for herbicide use in areas where rare plants may occur. No No No Invasive species As above for construction and decommissioning. OPP will specify measures to prevent introduction and/or spread of invasive species for ongoing maintenance activities, such as control of vegetation. These measures will be informed by a review of vegetation management plans developed for transmission line corridors by BC Hydro, including Integrated Vegetation Management Plan for Distribution Line Corridors (BC Hydro, 2005), Pest Management Plan for Management of Vegetation at BC Hydro Facilities (BC Hydro, 2006), and Approved Work Practices for Managing Riparian Vegetation (BC Hydro et al., 2003). Slow-growing later-successional plants may be used to prevent invasive plant spread and reduce pruning and maintenance requirement. No No Yes; see mitigation Potential Effect Introduction of silt and other harmful substances Proposed Mitigation Operation Follow-up and Monitoring The need for follow-up and monitoring is described in Section 15.2.4.2 and Section 21. Cumulative Effects Assessment The other projects and activities that have occurred, are occurring, or will occur within the CEA study area (see Section 4.6.1) are briefly described below. (Greater detail is provided in Section 15.2.4.1 above, and in the Forest Resource Values Cumulative Effects Assessment and Section 7.2 of the Keystone EA, in Appendix P and Appendix K, respectively, of this Application.) Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 751 - Cloudworks October 2011 Past Projects and Activities The Forest Act Amendment Act was introduced in 1947. Harvesting impacts that preceded that time have more than likely been mitigated through natural succession and are not considered likely to contribute to cumulative impacts on forest resource values. Around 1947, the LUs in the study area were characterized by relatively vast areas of undisturbed old-growth forests and fairly limited resource extraction or industrial development (McCombs and Chittenden 1988). Prior to 1960, 6,622 ha of timber had been harvested in the Tretheway, Shovel, and Big Silver CEA study area combined. This may be an underestimate, as logging regulations and records were not well kept before the mechanized logging era. Between 1960 and 1990, 21,466 ha of timber were removed in the Tretheway, Shovel, and Big Silver CEA study area. Between 1990 and 2002, 516 ha of timber were removed in the Tretheway, Shovel, and Big Silver CEA study area. Cumulatively, 29% of the treed area in the Tretheway, Shovel, and Big Silver CEA study area had been removed by 2002. Forestry has had the most impact on the landscape compared to the history of mining, fur trapping, settlement, and fishing in the area. Historical forestry (from as early as the 1940s) and associated logging camps are likely a major reason that wildlife and plants that depend on un-fragmented habitat or large old growth habitat features are rare on the landscape. The constructions of the railway, Highway 1, and numerous logging roads in the area have led to additional resource extraction. Current Projects and Activities The LUs within the study area are mainly forested areas, with trees up to 250+ years in age, with a network of forestry roads that were and are used to harvest timber throughout the region. Many creeks within the study area have water licences for domestic or commercial extraction, as well as small-scale power generation. The Tipella Creek Waterpower Project is located in the Tretheway LU and the Stokke Creek Waterpower project is located in the Big Silver LU. The 138kV transmission line associated with the Stokke Creek project runs to the north along the east side of Harrison Lake from Stokke Creek. There is a BC Hydro 360 kV transmission line along the west side of Harrison Lake (3L02 circuit) running through the eastern edge of the Tretheway LU. Within the Big Silver LU, the main transportation artery is the East Harrison FSR, running along the east side of Harrison Lake and connecting the community of Harrison Hot Springs to the south, through the Big Silver LU, to the Kookipi Creek FSR which continues north and east to Boston Bar in the Fraser Canyon. The East Harrison FSR is heavily used by industrial and recreation traffic from Harrison Hot Springs to Big Silver camp. North of Big Silver camp, the FSR is mainly used by recreation traffic. Within the Tretheway LU, the main transportation artery is the West Harrison FSR, running along the west side of Harrison Lake and connecting the communities of Harrison Mills to the south to the community of Tipella to the north. At Tipella, the West Harrison FSR joins the Lillooet West FSR and continues north to Pemberton. Currently, north of Bremner Creek, the FSR is in poor shape and recreation and industrial use is low. Logging camps, airstrips, cabins, recreation sites, and scattered wilderness campsites and recreational trails also occur in the Big Silver CEA study area. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Cloudworks October 2011 - 752 - The study area has relatively small amounts of old growth forest remaining. To ensure representative old growth areas remain, Old Growth Management Area targets (OGMAs) have been established for each LU. Percent area targets have also been established in each LU for Wildlife Tree Retention Areas (WTRAs) and Wildlife Habitat Areas (WHAs). Regulations for the maintenance of these features have been developed, which specify limits of disturbance and activity and amendment and replacement procedures if forestry activities are required within these features. There are a number of licensees that currently hold tenure and either operate in or have outstanding silviculture obligations within the study areas. Active forest harvesting and management of outstanding obligations is ongoing. Future or Proposed Projects and Activities The scope of other future or proposed projects and activities was described in Section 15.2.4.1. The AAC for the Fraser TSA is 1.27 million cubic metres a year, with 290,918 ha of land available for timber harvesting (Pederson 2004). Sixty percent of the Fraser THLB area is less than 60 years of age (Pederson 2004). It is assumed that a portion of the AAC will be harvested from within the study area annually. There is one 15.6ha cutblock proposed adjacent to Trio Creek (in the Tretheway LU), but currently no other cutblocks are proposed. However, as several licensees hold active forest tenure within the study areas, it is assumed that additional cutblocks are in various stages of development, and that harvesting activities will continue into the foreseeable future. Determination of Cumulative Environmental Effects Other types of projects and activities likely to interact with the residual environmental effects of the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project are summarized in Table 15-51. Timber resources Loss of productive land from THLB Recreation Transportation Settlements Residual Environmental Effect of the Project Mineral Extraction Valued Environmental Component Power Generation and Transmission Assessment of Potential Interactions between Other Projects and Activities and Project Residual Environmental Effects within the Big Silver CEA Study Area Forestry Table 15-51 The specific projects and activities within these general categories that would most likely interact with the residual environmental effects of the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project include forestry (past, present, and future), the road network (existing), and electrical transmission lines (existing and future). Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects - 753 - Cloudworks October 2011 Evaluation of Cumulative Environmental Effects The primary effect of the Big Silver Creek Waterpower Project on the THLB is a permanent loss of land area within the LU that is considered to be productive for the growth of merchantable tree species. A total of 72.3 ha of productive forest land is expected to be cleared in the Big Silver LU for Project components of both the Shovel Creek and Big Silver Creek Waterpower Projects. This equates to approximately 0.4% of the total operable, productive land within the LU. (Clearing associated with that portion of the Big Silver transmission line located on the west side of Harrison Lake (i.e., in the Tretheway LU) is assessed in Section 5.2.4.2, together with the effects of the Tretheway Creek Waterpower Project.) It is expected that a portion of this cleared area will be reverted to productive status at the completion of construction activities. The total area planned for clearing by all Three Proposed Projects is less than 0.1% of the total THLB within the Fraser TSA. Again, as suitable areas are revegetated, the loss to the THLB will be further reduced. Historical forestry activities are the primary contributor to the existing baseline condition of timber resources. Timber harvesting activities are not considered to contribute to the loss of productive forest land, as these areas will be reforested and remain productive. However, forestry activities that have contributed to the loss of productive land include development of road systems, camp locations, log sorts, and barge landing sites. Forestry will continue to contribute to the loss of productive forest land primarily through the development and maintenance of forest road systems. Current provincial forestry regulation specifies the limits of non-productive area (as a percentage of harvested areas) that can be created during harvesting operations. Existing transportation and transmission line corridors are classified as unproductive areas within the study boundaries and therefore are not included in the TLHB. Recent completion of the Tipella Creek hydroelectric project, within the Tretheway LU, and Stokke Creek hydroelectric project, within the Big Silver LU, have resulted in the conversion of approximately 40ha from a productive state (including transmission lines). Cumulatively, effects on timber resources in the CEA study area can be categorized as nibbling effects. The effects from the proposed Project combined with the effects from past, current, and ongoing forestry road development and other land use activities all contribute to incremental losses of land area suitable for the growth of merchantable tree species within the study area. However, the cumulative effect on productive forest land is considered to be not significant. Table 15-52 summarizes the assessment of cumulative environmental effects on timber resources. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Table 15-52 Evaluation Criteria Cloudworks October 2011 - 754 - Timber Resources Cumulative Effects Analysis for Big Silver CEA Study Area Cumulative Effects without Big Silver Creek Project Big Silver Creek Contribution to Cumulative Effects Comments Amount of productive forest land that will be removed due to development of the Three Proposed Projects is very small in relation to the amount of area which is expected to remain productive within the study area (less than 1% of the THLB in the Fraser TSA). For the Shovel Creek and Big Silver Creek Waterpower Projects together, only 0.4% of the THLB within the Big Silver LU will be lost to Project clearing. Magnitude Negligible Negligible Geographic Extent Sub-regional Local The loss of productive forest land will occur only on the footprint areas of the Project. Long-term and Infrequent Long-term and Infrequent Clearing of productive forest land for transportation and transmission corridors and for Project facilities occurs once, but these areas are likely to remain in a cleared state throughout the life of the Project. Duration and Frequency Reversibility Context Long-term High Long-term High Significance Not significant Not significant Confidence High High The loss of productive forest land within the Project footprint will be a long-term effect lasting for the lifetime of the Project. It is anticipated the permanent footprint area can be returned to a productive state upon Project decommissioning. Productive forest areas are considered to have a high resistance to change. Clearing of the Project footprint areas should have no effect on the function of remaining productive areas within the study area boundaries. Other projects and activities have not and are not expected to have a significant cumulative effect on the amount of productive forest land within the LU. The Three Proposed Projects are also expected to result in no significant adverse cumulative effects on timber resources. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects 15.3 - 755 - Cloudworks October 2011 SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: BIG SILVER CREEK WATERPOWER PROJECT Valued Environmental Components Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction Soils Project facilities will be located in or adjacent to areas of prior disturbance, and will avoid sensitive soils, where feasible. The extent of clearing, grubbing, and other activities will be restricted to carefully flagged Project footprints. Pushover logging will not be permitted. Temporary uses will be located on areas with higher soil rehabilitation potential where feasible. Soil management practices will meet or exceed applicable guidelines. Prior to construction, site-specific surveys will be conducted to identify unstable slopes and sensitive soils, and to inform placement of drainage and erosion control structures and soil handling procedures. Soil management procedures will be documented in contract specifications (e.g., for road work), and in the CEMP. Soil in areas not occupied by permanent Project facilities will be rehabilitated as soon as feasible following construction. Site-specific rehabilitation plans will be developed by a qualified professional. Erosion and sedimentation plan will be in place. Natural drainage patterns will be restored. Soil management in sensitive areas and soil rehabilitation and revegetation will be monitored. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Fugitive dust Limit vehicle speeds. Water areas in dry conditions. Replant areas and minimize exposed soils. Moisten fine materials or use covers on dump trucks. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. GHG and CAC emissions Minimize idling and turn off machinery when not in use. Operate equipment at optimum loads Ensure proper maintenance of equipment Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. None The Project may reduce or avoid GHG (and CAC) emissions associated with the generation of the equivalent amount of electricity by fossil fuel combustion elsewhere. This is considered a positive effect. Loss of soil productivity and hydrologic function Construction Air Quality GHG offset/reduction Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 756 - Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Cloudworks October 2011 Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction and Decommissioning of Temporary Facilities Changes to TSS, turbidity, DO Construction work in the dry. Implementation of CEMP incorporating relevant BMPs, addressing isolation of work areas, erosion and sediment control, soil management, bank stabilization, revegetation, waste management (including organic debris), and fire prevention and response. Steep and turbulent nature of the diversion reach and cold stream temperatures will moderate effects. Managed discharge of stored water. Channel design to minimize water temperature increases. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Changes to pH and nitrogen Implementation of CEMP incorporating relevant BMPs, addressing blast residue and blast rock use and ARD/ML (see below). Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Accidental spills of contaminants Construction work in the dry. Implementation of CEMP incorporating relevant BMPs addressing hazardous and toxic materials management, spill prevention and response, waste management, and education and training. Use of environmentally appropriate lubricants and coolants. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Changes due to ARD/ML, blasting Sampling of rocks for acid-generating potential. Containing, neutralizing any potentially acid-generating waste rock. Water sampling to monitor ARD/ML near spoil sites. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Changes to all water quality parameters Implementation of CEMP incorporating relevant BMPs. Stabilizing exposed areas to be flooded and filling in the headpond slowly. Penstock flush water stored before discharge to stream. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Accidental spills of contaminants As above for construction and decommissioning of temporary facilities. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Changes to TSS and turbidity Implementation of OPP incorporating relevant BMPs. Vegetation between the road and the stream left as intact as possible. Headpond flushing during natural high flow events. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Changes to DO and TGP Same as for TSS and turbidity. Headpond infilling over time. Design features to prevent air entrainment. Mixing and turbulence in the tailrace and downstream reach. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Accidental spills of contaminants As above for construction and decommissioning of temporary facilities. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Changes to TSS, turbidity, DO Same as for construction (or more stringent standards in effect at the time, if any). Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Changes to pH, nitrogen, contaminants Same as for construction (or more stringent standards in effect at the time, if any). Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Commissioning Water Quality Operation Decommissioning Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 757 - Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Cloudworks October 2011 Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction and Decommissioning of Temporary Facilities Fish Rearing and Overwintering Habitat Substrate movement Duration of construction minimized. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Burying underwater transmission line cable on east and west shores of Harrison Lake Shoreline rebuilt with regionally approved materials and following the natural grade. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Water quality, physical disturbance due to blasting Construction work in the dry. Implementation of CEMP incorporating relevant BMPs addressing blast residue and blast rock use. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Increased water temperature Minimize extent of riparian disturbance. Implementation of CEMP incorporating relevant BMPs addressing revegetation. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Short-term habitat loss Instream work during fisheries windows. Fish salvage. Buried penstock crossings. Stream channel rebuilt using natural materials, grade. Fording avoided or in compliance with DFO guidelines. Implementation of CEMP incorporating relevant BMPs addressing waste management, hazardous materials management, spill prevention and response, revegetation. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Long-term habitat loss Minimized extent of disturbance. Unavoidable habitat loss offset by suitable compensation habitat at appropriate ratios. Monitoring of compensation habitat function. Compensation habitat maintenance at full function for life of project. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Compliance with standard ramping rates unless less stringent rates demonstrated to be acceptable. Ramping rate tests to determine ramping rates protective of fish. Maintenance of IFR. Fish stranding contingency plan. Fire prevention and response measures. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Commissioning Changes in flow Operation Implementation of OPP, including maintenance of IFR, emergency response procedures, and fire prevention and response. Unavoidable habitat loss offset by compensation habitat per construction. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Changes in flow due to ramping Implementation of OPP, including adherence to ramping rates protective of fish, fish stranding contingency plan, and emergency response procedures. Continuous flow monitoring. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Extreme changes in water temperature Natural conditions will moderate temperature. Water temperature monitoring and adaptive management as required. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Bedload trapping and backwatering upstream of the diversion weir Mitigated over time through headpond infilling. Implementation of OPP, including annual sediment sluicing from headpond. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Water quality, physical disturbance due to blasting Same as for construction (or more stringent standards in effect at the time, if any). Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Increased water temperature, habitat loss Same as for construction (or more stringent standards in effect at the time, if any). Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Loss of habitat due to flow diversion Decommissioning Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 758 - Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Cloudworks October 2011 Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction and Decommissioning of Temporary Facilities Substrate movement Duration of construction minimized. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Burying underwater transmission line cable on east and west shores of Harrison Lake Shoreline rebuilt with regionally approved materials and following the natural grade. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Water quality, physical disturbance due to blasting As above for fish rearing and overwintering habitat Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. As above for fish rearing and overwintering habitat Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Loss of habitat due to flow diversion As above for fish rearing and overwintering habitat Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Changes in flow due to ramping As above for fish rearing and overwintering habitat Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Extreme changes in water temperature As above for fish rearing and overwintering habitat Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Commissioning Changes in flow Fish Spawning and Incubation Habitat Operation Bedload trapping by the diversion weir Unavoidable habitat loss offset by compensation habitat. Implementation of OPP, including annual sediment sluicing from headpond. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Decommissioning Same as during construction Same as for construction (or more stringent standards in effect at the time, if any). Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 759 - Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Cloudworks October 2011 Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction and Decommissioning of Temporary Facilities Water quality, physical disturbance due to blasting and As above for fish rearing and overwintering habitat No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Compliance with standard ramping rates unless less stringent rates demonstrated to be acceptable. Ramping rate tests to determine ramping rates protective of fish. Maintenance of IFR. Fish stranding contingency plan. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Commissioning Changes in flow Fish Migratory Habitat Operation Attraction to tailrace flows Reduced flows in diversion reach impeding up/ downstream migration No anadromous fish are able to access the diversion reach and there is low utilization of the lower diversion reach by Dolly Varden and rainbow trout. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Implementation of OPP, including maintenance of IFR, ramping rate protocols, and emergency response procedures. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Decommissioning Same as during construction Same as for construction (or more stringent standards in effect at the time, if any). No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Construction and Decommissioning of Temporary Facilities Riparian Habitat Short-term habitat loss Avoidance of (high/climax value) riparian habitat where possible. Minimized extent of riparian disturbance. Site-specific vegetation characteristics documented prior to disturbance to inform restoration prescriptions. Site-specific riparian restoration treatments/prescriptions for on- and off-site areas. Implementation of CEMP incorporating relevant BMPs addressing erosion and sediment control, soil management, invasive plant management, revegetation, and fire prevention and response. Minimized use of machinery and equipment in RMZ. Monitoring of revegetation for 5 years post-construction, and to ensure compensation habitat is effective. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Long-term loss of habitat function As above for short term habitat loss. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Slow filling of headpond. Location of penstock flush water pond outside of RMZ if possible. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Use of the BC Hydro Integrated Vegetation Management Plan for Transmission Rights-of-way (BC Hydro, 2010) for vegetation management. Habitat loss addressed in construction phase above. Implementation of OPP, including emergency response procedures and fire prevention and response. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Same as for construction (or more stringent standards in effect at the time, if any). Some Project infrastructure may remain in place for bank stabilization, if appropriate. Floristic succession will return all areas to climax riparian function. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Commissioning Bank stability, disturbance to riparian habitat Operation Maintenance of early seral stage on ROWs Decommissioning Loss of habitat function, bank instability Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 760 - Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Cloudworks October 2011 Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction and Decommissioning of Temporary Facilities Temporary decline in invertebrate production and loss of habitat Macroinvertebrate drift will continue through diversion channel. Minimized duration of construction. Implementation of CEMP incorporating relevant BMPs addressing erosion and sediment control, bank stabilization, and revegetation. Natural recolonization after disturbance. Compensation for unavoidable habitat loss. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Compliance with standard ramping rates unless less stringent rates demonstrated to be acceptable. Ramping rate tests to determine ramping rates protective of fish. Maintenance of IFR. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Commissioning Dewatering, stranding of invertebrates Operation Implementation of OPP, including maintenance of IFR, ramping protocols, and emergency response procedures. Macroinvertebrate Habitat Reduced habitat, flood flows Channel-forming flows will still occur. Unavoidable habitat loss offset by compensation habitat per construction. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Water temperature Temperature monitored continuously during the first five years of operation. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Habitat alteration in headpond Headpond infilling over time, development of variety of substrates. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Bedload trapping in the headpond. Annual sluicing of sediment from headpond. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Same as for construction (or more stringent standards in effect at the time, if any). Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Decommissioning Same as during construction Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 761 - Cloudworks October 2011 Key Mitigation Measures Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Habitat loss and fragmentation Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with ground cover, shrubs, or trees that are regionally appropriate (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Connectivity at stream crossings will be encouraged by limiting riparian clearing to the access road footprint or penstock where they cross the stream. Creek crossings (for creeks with year-round flow) will be surveyed prior to construction to determine tailed frog presence. Water diverted around construction site will be returned to the same stream immediately downstream of the work site when tailed frog tadpoles are observed. Construction and maintenance activities in and around watercourses will conform to Standards and Best Practices for Instream Works (BC MWLAP 2004), Best Management Practices for Amphibians and Reptiles (Ovaska et al. 2004), and other approved work practices, where feasible. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Introduction of silt and other harmful substances BMPs will be followed for in-stream works. CEMP will include sections on managing construction waste, spill prevention, and emergency response. Maintenance and refuelling will be conducted at an approved distance away from watercourses. Equipment will be checked to ensure systems are free of leaks and in good condition. All machines working near water will have spill kit, trained operators. Erosion and sedimentation plan will be in place. Clearing, grubbing will be minimized, especially in wet weather. Natural vegetation cover, woody debris, and organic matter will be retained when possible. Disturbed areas will be revegetated as soon as possible with regionally appropriate species. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Direct Mortality As above for habitat loss. Permits will be in place to salvage tailed frog tadpoles (or adults) during diversion of any stream for intake or penstock construction. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Habitat alteration, mortality due to herbicide use CEMP will include pest management plan with guidance for herbicide use. Broadcast spraying of chemical defoliants will be avoided around potential breeding sites. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Flow regulation in diversion reach Flow within diversion reach will be maintained as defined by operating parameters set by provincial government. Strategies will be in place to maintain fish habitat as described in Aquatic Environment section. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Potential Effects Construction and Decommissioning Pacific Tailed Frog Operation Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 762 - Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Cloudworks October 2011 Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and fragmentation Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. Connectivity at stream crossings will be encouraged by limiting riparian clearing to the access road footprint. Larger culverts or bridge crossings will be used. Construction and maintenance activities in and around watercourses will conform to Standards and Best Practices for Instream Works (BC MWLAP 2004), Best Management Practices for Amphibians and Reptiles (Ovaska et al. 2004), and other approved work practices, where feasible. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Introduction of silt and other harmful substances As above for Pacific Tailed Frog. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Increased road mortality and direct mortality Construction activities will be avoided in/around wetlands (where amphibian breeding is noted) to extent feasible. If unavoidable, construction in these areas will be scheduled after breeding is complete and toadlets/juveniles have dispersed where feasible and appropriate. Natural drainage will be maintained to protect wetland hydrology. If construction cannot be rescheduled, Environmental Monitor will install fencing to direct amphibian migrations away from roads, or culverts to be installed to direct amphibians safely across the road. These measures will be monitored during peak amphibian activity to ensure they are effective. Congregrations and mortality of toadlets/amphibians will be reported to Environmental Monitor, who will identify problem areas and implement additional measures (such as fencing), as required. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Habitat alteration, mortality due to herbicide use Maintenance workers will be informed of potential amphibian use and/or congregations if maintenance activities occur during the times of the year when congregations are anticipated. As above for Pacific Tailed Frog. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Increased road mortality Maintenance work in or adjacent to known locations of amphibian congregations identified during construction will be scheduled for times when congregations are absent, to the extent feasible. Congregrations and mortality of toadlets/amphibians will be reported to Environmental Monitor, who will identify problem areas and implement additional measures (such as fencing), as required. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Western Toad Operation Construction and Decommissioning Red-legged Frog Habitat loss and fragmentation As above for Western Toad. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Introduction of silt and other harmful substances As above for Pacific Tailed Frog. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Increased road mortality and direct mortality As above for Western Toad. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Habitat alteration, mortality due to herbicide use As above for Western Toad. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Increased road mortality As above for Western Toad. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Operation Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 763 - Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Cloudworks October 2011 Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction and Decommissioning Rubber Boa Habitat loss and fragmentation, associated mortality Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Some large CWD will be left in cleared areas and placed along forested and riparian edges. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Construction and Decommissioning Northern Goshawk Habitat loss and fragmentation Inactive or active nests found in close proximity to construction areas will be reported to the Environmental Monitor. Appropriate setback buffers will be established around active nests (if any are identified) (per BMPs in Demarchi and Bentley 2005, BC MOE 2006a) and will be monitored during construction, if work must commence during the breeding season and the active nest is adjacent to a work site. As above for Rubber Boa. Rather than completely removing some large trees near the edge of a footprint, the possibility of creating snags by “stubbing” will be considered, providing it is safe to do so. Mature and old-growth forest will be avoided and existing disturbance corridors followed, where feasible. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Construction and Decommissioning Nest loss and disturbance due to loud construction noise Great Blue Heron Great Blue Heron nests are protected by law; lead regulatory agency will be consulted if nests are identified in or near (within 500 m) final Project footprints. Areas within 500 m of any Project footprints will be surveyed prior to construction to identify any large stick nests. Inactive or active nests found in close proximity to construction areas will be reported to the Environmental Monitor. Appropriate setback buffers will be established around active nests (if any are identified) (per BMPs in Demarchi and Bentley 2005, BC MOE 2006a) and will be monitored during construction, if work must commence during the breeding season and the active nest is adjacent to a work site. If a vacant nest is located in a Project footprint and cannot be avoided, the lead regulatory agency will be consulted to develop a plan to relocate the nest. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. The configuration of the conductors on the transmission line poles will reduce and likely eliminate potential for avian electrocution. If avian mortality due to collision or electrocution is suspected, the transmission line will be monitored and preventative measures put into place, under the guidance of a qualified professional biologist. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. As above for Rubber Boa. Mature and old-growth forest will be avoided and existing disturbance corridors followed, where feasible. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. As above for Great Blue Heron. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Operation Avian mortality from transmission line Construction Habitat loss Olive-sided Flycatcher Operation Avian mortality from transmission line Construction and Decommissioning Nest loss and disturbance due to loud construction noise Bald Eagle nests are protected by law; lead regulatory agency will be consulted if nests are identified in or near (within 500 m) final Project footprints. As above for Great Blue Heron. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Bald Eagle Operation Avian mortality from transmission line As above for Great Blue Heron No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 764 - Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Cloudworks October 2011 Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction and Decommissioning American Dipper Habitat alteration, displacement due to disturbance Instream works will be scheduled over short periods during dry season. As above for Rubber Boa. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Construction and Decommissioning Harlequin Duck Habitat loss and fragmentation As above for Rubber Boa. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Disturbance due to loud construction noise Before construction within 50 m of suitable Harlequin Duck nesting habitat during the breeding season (April 1 to August 31), a Harlequin Duck nest survey will be conducted by a qualified professional in accordance with current standards and guidelines. If a suspected nest site is located, work will be delayed in the area until ducklings have left the area. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. As above for Rubber Boa. Rather than completely removing some large trees near the edge of a footprint, the possibility of creating snags by “stubbing” will be considered, providing it is safe to do so. Mature and old-growth forest will be avoided and existing disturbance corridors followed, where feasible. If a nest tree is removed, placement of nest boxes will be considered. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Disturbed sites will be replanted quickly with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed). „Soft edges‟ will be created along right-of-way and access roads by maintaining shrub species along the forest edge. Relevant portions of Section 3 (Site Development and Management) of the Develop with Care (BC MOE 2006a) document will be applied, when appropriate. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. As above for Great Blue Heron. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Vegetation clearing will take place outside of the breeding bird season (March 15 to August 15) where possible to prevent disturbance of bird nests If clearing takes place during the breeding season, qualified professionals will complete nest surveys prior to construction to determine if nesting is occurring in the area. If nests are located, appropriate setback buffers for disturbance will be applied. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Avian mortality from transmission line As above for Great Blue Heron. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Nest abandonment and direct mortality due to clearing As above for construction. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. As above for Rubber Boa. Rather than completely removing some large trees near the edge of a footprint, the possibility of creating snags by “stubbing” will be considered, providing it is safe to do so. Mature and old-growth forest will be avoided and existing disturbance corridors followed, where feasible. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Construction Western Screechowl Habitat loss and fragmentation Construction Habitat loss and fragmentation Band-tailed Pigeon Operation Avian mortality from transmission line Construction Nest abandonment and direct mortality due to clearing Operation Migratory Birds Construction Spotted Owl Habitat loss and fragmentation Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 765 - Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Cloudworks October 2011 Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction, Operation, and Decommissioning Increased hunting mortality Crews will be prohibited from hunting in the area. Temporary roads and staging/spoil areas will be deactivated and planted with appropriate vegetation when no longer needed. Road deactivation will include measures designed to prevent ATV access. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Increased road mortality Safe speed limits along access roads will be imposed. Contractors/crews will be encouraged to use as few vehicles as possible to access work site. Wildlife observations will be recorded; Environmental Monitor will inform drivers of road sections frequented by wildlife. Temporary roads will be deactivated and re-planted with appropriate vegetation when no longer needed. Revegetation will use unpalatable regionally approved vegetation when re-planting cleared roadsides where feasible, to discourage foraging. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Columbian Black-tailed Deer Construction, Operation, and Decommissioning Grizzly and Black Bears Problem animal mortality Crews will participate in an appropriate wildlife awareness training program, and be instructed to refrain from feeding wildlife. Food scraps and garbage from construction sites will be removed or stored in bear-proof containers for proper disposal. Work crews will be prohibited from hunting and cleaning game in the Project area. Nuisance bears will be reported to a Conservation Officer, who would assist in determining appropriate measures. Human-Bear Conflict Management measures will be developed and included in the CEMP to provide clear procedures for handling bears that wander onto work sites. All road kill will be promptly moved from roadways to prevent scavenging wildlife (including bears) from being attracted to the roads. Revegetation will use unpalatable regionally approved vegetation when re-planting cleared roadsides where feasible, to discourage foraging. Wildlife observations will be recorded; Environmental Monitor will inform drivers of road sections frequented by wildlife. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and fragmentation Pacific Sideband As above for Rubber Boa. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. CEMP will include pest management plan with guidance for herbicide use in areas where species-at-risk may occur. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Operation Habitat alteration, mortality due to herbicide use Construction and Decommissioning Black Petaltail Habitat loss and fragmentation Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Sensitive ecosystems (wetlands) will be avoided during final project design to the extent feasible. Areas to be avoided will be identified and fenced off prior to construction activities, if located adjacent to the Project footprint. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Introduction of silt and other harmful substances BMPs will be followed for in-stream works. CEMP will include sections on managing construction waste, spill prevention, and emergency response. Equipment will be checked to ensure systems are free of leaks and in good condition. All machines working near water will have spill kit, trained operators. Erosion and sedimentation plan will be in place. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. As above for Pacific Sideband. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Operation Habitat alteration, mortality due to herbicide use Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 766 - Potential Effects Key Mitigation Measures Cloudworks October 2011 Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Construction and Decommissioning Habitat loss and direct mortality Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. If facility locations (including access roads, transmission lines, spoil areas, and laydown sites) change during the final design phase, new areas will be checked for the presence of rare plants. Rare plant communities and sensitive ecosystems known or identified during final design will be avoided and fenced off prior to construction activities, where located close to any Project footprint. Disturbance to or in special habitats (e.g., alluvial fans, lake beaches, non-forested wetlands, rock outcrops, cliffs) will be avoided to extent feasible. Natural drainage patterns will be maintained or restored. Soil rehabilitation and revegetation monitoring will be conducted. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Invasive species Preventing the establishment of invasive species is by far the most important step in mitigating the risk for introduction. The government of Canada currently employs inspection techniques at ports and border crossings to reduce the risk of importing many invasive insect species, and federal and provincial governments have strategies to address other points of introduction or spread on regional levels (Government of Canada 2004) Rare plant communities and sensitive ecosystems known or identified during final design will be avoided and fenced off prior to construction activities, where located close to any Project footprint. Disturbed sites will be revegetated as soon as possible after construction with regionally appropriate ground cover, shrubs, or trees (once erosion concerns have been addressed) and monitored for revegetation success. Prior to any land clearing or soil disturbance activities, a qualified individual familiar with invasive species identification will conduct a site survey to locate any occurrences of invasive species in areas potentially affected by the Project. Known occurrences of invasive species will be avoided in final facility siting/routing if feasible. Known occurrences of invasive species in or adjacent to work sites will be flagged in the field prior to construction. All construction vehicles and equipment will be thoroughly washed, paying special attention to undercarriages, wheel wells, tire treads, and tracks where mud, insect larvae, and seeds may be lodged, before their arrival to any work site or relocation from any site where invasive plants are already established. Washing areas will be located an appropriate distance away from any waterbody and riparian areas and run-off will be directed away from them. Domestic animals will be kept out of the work site whenever possible. Monitoring for invasive plants at any disturbance/reclaimed site will continue until revegetated sites are well established. Environmental Monitor will record presence of any newly established invasive species determined to be present because of construction. A professional biologist will assess any such new populations and develop an invasive plant removal strategy. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Introduction of silt and other harmful substances CEMP will include sections on managing construction waste, spill prevention, and emergency response. Maintenance and refuelling will be conducted at an approved distance away from watercourses. Equipment will be checked to ensure systems are free of leaks and in good condition. All machines working near water will have spill kit, trained operators. Erosion and sedimentation plan will be in place. Clearing, grubbing will be minimized, especially in wet weather. Natural vegetation cover, woody debris, and organic matter will be retained when possible. Disturbed areas will be revegetated as soon as possible with regionally appropriate species. Soil rehabilitation monitoring will inform recommendations for any follow-up soil rehabilitation activities that may be necessary to ensure soil rehabilitation success. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Mortality due to herbicide use CEMP will include pest management plan with guidance for herbicide use in areas where rare plants may occur. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Invasive species As above for construction and decommissioning. OPP will specify measures to prevent introduction and/or spread of invasive species for ongoing maintenance activities, such as control of vegetation. These measures will be informed by a review of vegetation management plans developed for transmission line corridors by BC Hydro, including Integrated Vegetation Management Plan for Distribution Line Corridors (BC Hydro, 2005), Pest Management Plan for Management of Vegetation at BC Hydro Facilities (BC Hydro, 2006), and Approved Work Practices for Managing Riparian Vegetation (BC Hydro et al., 2003). Slow-growing later-successional plants may be used to prevent invasive plant spread and reduce pruning and maintenance requirement. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected. Rare Plants and Rare Ecological Communities Operation Application for an Environmental Assessment Certificate Waterpower Projects Valued Environmental Components - 767 - Cloudworks October 2011 Key Mitigation Measures Significance Analysis of Residual Environmental Effects Clearing will be restricted to carefully flagged areas within development footprints, except where hazard tree removal is required. Areas not occupied by Project structures and not required to remain cleared for safety and access purposes will be revegetated after construction. A qualified professional will oversee all revegetation planning and activities. The CEMP will include BMPs for site evaluation, clearing, soil conservation, and rehabilitation to ensure opportunities for successful revegetation are maximized. After soil rehabilitation, depending on site conditions, revegetation will include planting ecologically suitable tree and understory species, as well as seeding of suitable areas with herb, shrub, and grass species to promote development of ecologically appropriate ground cover. Soil rehabilitation and revegetation monitoring will be conducted. Residual effects, including cumulative effects, are expected to be not significant. Potential Effects Construction Loss of timber resources due to clearing Timber Resources Construction, Operation, and Decommissioning Loss of timber resources due to fire Fire Abatement Plan will be prepared for all Project phases. FAP will address wildfire awareness, risk assessment, risk monitoring, activity protocols, fire-fighting resources and equipment, worker training, and wildfire response and suppression. No residual effects or cumulative effects are expected.
