analysis of conflict between potential resource use and wildlife conservation in the muskuwa-kechika...

Analysis of Conflict between Potential Resource Use and Wildlife Conservation in The Muskuwa-Kechika Management Area

Nobuya (Nobi) Suzuki, Natural Resources and Environmental Studies InstituteUniversity of Northern British Columbia

Katherine Parker,Natural Resources and Environmental Studies InstituteUniversity of Northern British Columbia

Accomplishment 1: Significantly upgraded 4 resource potential Layers

Mineral Potential Forest Potential

Wind Power Potential Oil and Gas Potential

Accomplishment 2: Developed GIS layers of Multiple Resource Potential and Resource Potential Diversity

6 Spatial Data Tools to assess levels of conflict between potential natural resource development and geographical areas of your interest

Mineral Potential Forest Potential

Wind Power Potential Oil and Gas Potential

Multiple Resource Potential

Resource Potential Diversity

Guide Outfitter Polygons Trap Line Polygons

Application Possibilities6 tools can be applied to assess potential conflict with resource use for any polygons

How we created Resource Potential Layers

BC Metallic Mineral Potential BC Industrial Mineral Potential

How we developed Mineral Potential Layer for the MKMA

BC Metallic Mineral Potential

BC Industrial Mineral Potential

Higher Value of the 2 layers

Combined Metallic-Industrial Mineral Potential

CroppedMKMA

• Mineral Tenure Sites • Mineral Occurrence Database points in

“Prospect” and Developed “Prospect”

• Occurrence of Coal Geology (Gething Formation)

Final Mineral Potential for the MKMA

Vegetation Resource Inventory Data1) Tree Diameter2) Basal Area (Total Cross Sectional Area of Trees/ha) 3) Stand Volume4) Site Index (Site Productivity)

They are highly correlated

• Index of forest potential = statistically combined 4 variables into 1 index value

• Ranked all pixels (50m x 50m) from low to high forest potential

How we developed Forest Potential Layer for the MKMA

How we developed Wind Potential Layer for the MKMA

How we developed Wind Potential Layer for the MKMA

• Wind speed data from Canadian Wind Energy Atlas

• Wind direction data from 16 wildfire weather stations

Obtained Wind Data

Identified Suitable Topography: Ridgelines, Gentle Hills, and High Plateau

Power generation potential of ridgeline

2) Gentle Hills and High Plateau• Slope < 20%• Elevation above the nearest

body of water• Distance to the nearest power

line or Wind power tenure site

1) Ridges • Slope < 20%• 100m wide• Distance to the nearest power line

or wind power tenure site

3) Ridges, Gentle Hills and Plateau Combined

50m pixel values were summed over the 500 ha planning units

Wind power potential values at the planning unit level were scaled to either 0-100 or 0-50.

How we created Oil and Gas Potential Layer for the MKMA

Oil and Gas GeologyGeological Potential of Oil and Gas

Alternative Scoring

Primary Scoring

Resource site potential

Distance to the nearest oil and gas fields, pools, or tenure sites

Pipeline Distance Class

Pipeline Distance Class Elevation

Elevation-Pipeline Distance Combined

Resource site potential

Geological Potential of Oil and Gas

Elevation-Pipeline Distance Combined

Conventional Natural Gas potential

How we developed Multiple Resource Potential and Resource Potential Diversity LayersWhat exactly are they?

Mineral Potential Forest Potential Wind Power Potential Oil and Gas Potential

Multiple Resource Potential

Mineral Potential Forest Potential Wind Power Potential Oil and Gas Potential

Resource Potential Diversity

Shannon Diversity Index

High Value (Dark Orange) indicatesAll 4 resource types may be present in the planning unit and resource potential value of each of the 4 resource may be also high.

Low value (Dark Blue) indicatesVery low number of resource type, may be only 1 resource type present and resource potential value may be also low

Resource Potential DiversitySimultaneously measures number of resource types and how high their resource potential values are

Accomplishment 3:We assessed levels of potential conflict between Resource Use and Wildlife Habitat for the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area.

How we assessed potential conflict between resource use and wildlife habitat

Conservation Area Design (CAD) Study

Highly Suitable Habitat of Species A(Top 30 Percentile)

Multiple Resource Potential

Multiple Resource Potential within Highly Suitable habitat of Species A

Multiple Resource Potential within Highly Suitable habitat of Species A

Eliminated Parks, Reserves, Protected Areas

Stone SheepHighly Suitable Growing Habitat Highly Suitable Winter Habitat

Multiple Resource Potential for Comparison

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-1000

5

10

15

20

25

30

Growing Habitat Winter Habitat

Multiple Resource Potential

Perc

ent o

f Hig

hly

Suita

ble

Hab

itat Medium

Resource PotentialHigh

Resource PotentialLow

Resource Potential

Stone Sheep/Highly Suitable Habitat in Conflict with Multiple Resource Potential

Multiple Resource Potential for Comparison

Highly Suitable Growing Habitat Highly Suitable Winter HabitatMountain Goat

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-1000

5

10

15

20

25

30Growing Habitat Winter Habitat

Multiple Resource Potential

Perc

ent o

f Hig

hly

Suita

ble

Hab

itat

Mountain Goat/Highly Suitable Habitat in Conflict with Multiple Resource Potential

LowResource Potential

MediumResource Potential

HighResource Potential

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-1000

5

10

15

20

25

Growing HabitatPe

rcen

t of H

ighl

y Su

itabl

e Ha

bita

t

Caribou/Highly Suitable Habitat in Conflict with Multiple Resource Po-tential

High Resource Potential

Multiple Resource Potential

Low Resource Potential

Medium Resource Potential

CaribouHighly Suitable Growing Habitat

Highly Suitable Winter Habitat

Multiple Resource Potential for Comparison

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-1000

5

10

15

20

25

Winter Habitat

Multiple Resource Potential

Perc

ent o

f Hig

hly

Suita

ble

Hab

itat

MediumResource Potential

High Resource Potential

Caribou/Highly Suitable Habitat in Conflict with Multiple Resource Potential

LowResource Potential

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-1000

5

10

15

20

25

Growing Habitat Winter Habitat

Multiple Resource Potential

Perc

ent o

f Hig

hly

Suita

ble

Hab

itat

Caribou/ Highly Suitable Habitat in Potential Conflict with Resource Use

High Resource Potential

MediumResource Potential

Low Resource Potential

MooseHighly Suitable Growing Habitat Highly Suitable Winter Habitat

Multiple Resource Potential for Comparison

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-100

0

5

10

15

20

25

Growing HabitatWinter Habitat

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-100

0

5

10

15

20

25

Multiple Resource Potential

Perc

ent o

f Hig

hly

Suita

ble

Hab

itat

Highly Suitable Habitat in Conflict with Resource Use

Moose

Elk

HighResource Potential

MediumResource Potential

MediumResource Potential

LowResource Potential

LowResource Potential

Multiple Resource Potential for Comparison

ElkHighly Suitable Growing Habitat Highly Suitable Winter Habitat

Multiple Resource Potential for Comparison

Highly Suitable Growing Habitat Highly Suitable Winter HabitatWolf

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-100

0

5

10

15

20

25

Growing Habitat

Winter Habitat

0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70 70-80 80-90 90-100

0

5

10

15

20

25

Early Grow-ing Habitat

Late Growing Habitat

Multiple Resource Potential

Highly Suitable Habitat in Conflict with Resource UsePe

rcen

t of H

ighl

y Su

itabl

e H

abita

t Wolf

Grizzly Bear

Multiple Resource Potential for Comparison

Highly Suitable Growing Habitat Highly Suitable Winter HabitatGrizzly Bear

Elk (W

)

Moose (W

)

Moose (G

)

Wolf (

W)

Elk (G

)

Caribou (W

)

Wolf (

G)

Grizzly

Bear (LG)

Caribou (G

)

Grizzly

Bear (EG)

Stone Sh

eep (W)

Mountain Goat (W)

Stone Sh

eep (G)

Mountain Goat (G)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35Pe

rcen

t of H

ighl

y Su

itabl

e H

abita

t

Area of High Resource Potential in Highly Suitable HabitatConflict Ranking of 7 Wildlife Species

G = Growing HabitatW = Winter Habitat*EG = Early Growing Habitat*LG = Late Growing Habitat* is for Grizzly Bears

Moo

se (G

)

Grizz

ly (E

G)

Grizz

ly (L

G)

Elk

(G)

Moo

se (W

)

Carib

ou (G

)

Shee

p (G

)

Goat

(W)

Carib

ou (W

)

Wol

f (G)

Shee

p (W

)

Elk

(W)

Goat

(G)

Wol

f (W

)050000

100000150000200000250000300000350000400000

High Mineral Potential Ar

ea (h

a)

Moo

se (W

)

Moo

se (G

)

Carib

ou (W

)

Elk

(W)

Wol

f (W

)

Grizz

ly (L

G)

Elk

(G)

Wol

f (G)

Grizz

ly (E

G)

Goat

(W)

Carib

ou (G

)

Shee

p (G

)

Shee

p (W

)

Goat

(G)0100000200000300000400000500000600000700000

High Forest Potential

Area

(ha)

Area of High Resource Potential in Highly Suitable Wildlife Habitat

Carib

ou (W

)

Moo

se (W

)

Elk

(W)

Moo

se (G

)

Wol

f (G)

Wol

f (W

)

Grizz

ly (L

G)

Elk

(G)

Grizz

ly (E

G)

Carib

ou (G

)

Shee

p (G

)

Goat

(G)

Shee

p (W

)

Goat

(W)0

100002000030000400005000060000

High Wind Power PotentialAr

ea (h

a)

Elk

(W)

Moo

se (W

)

Carib

ou (W

)

Elk

(G)

Wol

f (W

)

Moo

se (G

)

Wol

f (G)

Grizz

ly (L

G)

Shee

p (W

)

Carib

ou (G

)

Goat

(W)

Grizz

ly (E

G)

Shee

p (G

)

Goat

(G)0

100000200000300000400000500000600000

High Oil and Gas Potential

Area

(ha)

Area of High Resource Potential in Highly Suitable Wildlife Habitat

CaribouHigher levels of conflict in winter habitat than in growing habitat

Moose and ElkHighest levels of potential conflict in both growing and winter habitat

Wolves Moderate levels of potential conflict in both growing and winter habitat.

GrizzlyLevels of potential conflict are generally low but appear to increase in late growing habitat.

Stone Sheep and Mountain GoatLowest levels of potential conflict in both growing and winter habitat

All SpeciesHigher levels of potential conflict to some extent in winter habitat (or late growing habitat) than in growing habitat (or early growing habitat).

Caveats

• Conflict in our assessment does not address whether it is an adverse effect or not.

• Some species are more sensitive or less sensitive than others.

Task in Progress

Assessment of potential conflict between Resource Use and Wildlife Habitat for Special Resource Management Zones in the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area.

Special Resource Management Zones of the MKMA

• We assessed areas of high multiple resource potential in highly suitable wildlife habitat for 22 Special Resource Management Zones

Suitable Habitat vs. Multiple Resource Potential across Special Resource Management Zone

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

Highly Suitable Growing Habitat (All Species)High Multiple Resource Potential

Area

(ha)

Growing Habitat for All Species Combined

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

Highly Suitable Winter Habitat (All Species)

High Multiple Resource Potential

Area

(ha)

Suitable Habitat vs. Multiple Resource Potential across Special Resource Management Zone

Winter Habitat for All Species Combined

Area of High Resource Potential in Highly Suitable Wildlife Habitat Across Special Resource Management Areas

Growing Season Habitat

Winter Habitat

Area of High Resource Potential in Highly Suitable Wildlife Habitat Across Special Resource Management Areas

Obo River

Fox

Alaska

Hwy Corri

dor

Fishing

Muskwa W

est

GRAHAM-NORTH

RMZ 2

Prophet

Term

inal

Churchill

8Mile / S

ulpher

Stone M

ountain

GRAHAM-NORTH

RMZ 1

Toad

River C

orridor

Muskwa R

iver C

orridor

Aeroplan

e

Kechika

River C

orridor

Rabbit

Moodie

Turnag

ain Dall

River C

orridor

BESA HALF

WAY C

HOWADE

Sandpile

Rainbow

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

High Mineral Potential

Area

(ha)

Se-ries1

0

50000

100000

150000

200000High Forest Potential

Are

a (h

a)Areas of High Resource Potential Across 22 Special Resource Management Zones

Obo River

Fox

Alaska

Hwy Corri

dor

Fishing

Muskwa W

est

GRAHAM-NORTH

RMZ 2

Prophet

Term

inal

Churchill

8Mile / S

ulpher

Stone M

ountain

GRAHAM-NORTH

RMZ 1

Toad

River C

orridor

Muskwa R

iver C

orridor

Aeroplan

e

Kechika

River C

orridor

Rabbit

Moodie

Turnag

ain Dall

River C

orridor

BESA HALF

WAY C

HOWADE

Sandpile

Rainbow

050000

100000150000200000250000300000350000

High Oil and Gas Potential

Area

(ha)

Se-ries1

0

10000

20000

30000High Wind Potential

Area

(ha)

Area of High Multiple Resource Potential in Caribou and Moose Habitat for Special Resource Management Areas

050000

100000150000200000250000

Highly Suitable Win-ter Habitat

High Multiple Resource Poten-tial

Are

a (h

a)

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

Highly Suitable Win-ter HabitatHigh Multiple Resource Poten-tial

Are

a (h

a)

Caribou (Winter Habitat)

Moose (Winter Habitat)

Obo River

Alaska Hwy Corridor

Muskwa West

Prophet

Churchill

Stone Mountain

Toad River Corri

dor

Aeroplane

Rabbit

Turnagain Dall R

iver Corri

dor

Sandpile0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

Highly Suitable Winter HabitatHigh Multiple Resource Poten-tial

Area

(ha)

050000

100000150000200000250000300000

Highly Suitable Late Season Growing Habitat

High Multiple Resource Poten-tial

Are

a(ha

)

Wolf (Winter Habitat)

Grizzly Bear(Later Growing Season Habitat)

Area of High Multiple Resource Potential in Wolf and Grizzly Bear Habitat

High Potential Conflict Areas of Selected Species

Caribou/Winter Moose/Winter

Wolf/Winter Grizzly Bear/Late Growing Season