YAHK COORDINATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

 

3rd Update

February 17, 2003


 

 

Participants:

 

            Russ Hawkins (Tembec)

                        Terry Chow (Tembec)

Les Halvarson (Yahk)

Melissa Fuller (Yahk)

Joe Chambers (Dept. of Fisheries & Oceans)

Kenton Andreashuk (Columbia Kootenay Fisheries Renewal Partnership)

Jodie Kekula (Forest Service/Range)

Sue Crowley (Min. of Water, Land & Air Protection)

Mike Knapik (Min. of WLAP)

Al Pollard (B.C. Timber Sales)

Vic Clement, (Ktunaxa/Kinbasket Tribal Council)

Ron Popoff, Interior Health Authority)

Ian Knudsen (Grazing Licensee)
Dale Anderson (Forest Service – Plan Coordinator)

 

 

CONTENTS

 

Background

 

Objectives

 

Existing Problems

 

Wildlife/Biodiversity

 

Watershed

 

Timber/Silviculture

 

Livestock

 

Recreation

 

Miscellaneous

 

BACKGROUND

 

 

Coordinated Resource Management Planning is a well-proven approach to planning the use and management of natural resources.  To the extent possible under government legislation and policy, stakeholders in a geographical area are provided the opportunity to work out agreements and strategies between themselves. 

 

The Yahk CRMP was first compiled in 1977.  It was revised in 1993, and then again in 2003.  This document reflects the latest version.  Issues, participants, and strategies have changed considerably over this timeframe, which is to be expected.  Of particular importance is the commitment between participants to work together in a constructive manner.

 

This document is an attempt to capture major discussion points and agreements, but a working planning process is dynamic, and new developments constantly occur.  These are captured in the minutes of meetings and field trips, correspondence, studies, and reports.  The CRMP plan document should be updated periodically to incorporate new information and directions.

 

The geographical area of the Yahk CRMP is shown on the next page.  It consists of Landscape Unit K03, which was formally established in 1998 to allow landscape-level planning for biodiversity.  Previous CRMP documents referred only to the portion of K03 which contained tenures for the grazing of cattle (about 80% of the total area)

 

K03 is approximately 42,700 hectares in size.  41,300 hectares is Crown land (Provincial Forest).

OBJECTIVES

 

Tembec/BC Timber Sales

·        Continue to harvest timber

·        Reforest harvested areas promptly

·        Optimize timber production over time on a sustainable basis

·        Continue to provide revenue to the Crown and other benefits to society

·        Protect the soil

·        Keep the water clean

 

Livestock

·        Continue to graze livestock in this area

·        Facilitate  harmony between different resource users

·        Improve condition of riparian areas

·        Conduct inventory of range unit to determine carrying capacity for livestock and wildlife

 

Fisheries

·        Improve riparian management

·        Remove timber at an appropriate rate to protect streams

·        Keep grazing impacts to acceptable levels by optimizing cattle numbers and movement

·        Pursue public education and joint stream stewardship opportunities

 

Wildlife/Biodiversity

·        Promote healthy plant communities

·        Keep water clean

·        Maintain biodiversity and good habitat (at both stand lavel and landscape level)

 

Yahk Residents

·        Protect terrestrial and aquatic habitats

·        Strive for sustainability and balance in terms of resource use, water, and biodiversity.

·        Consider potential impacts of climate change

·        Develop preventative measures for surge flood events

·        Investigate the overall flow regime of Hawkins Creek

·        Conduct further assessments of watershed condition and other issues

·        Protect opportunities for public recreation, including commercial recreation opportunities

·        Include community in resource management decisions

 

Miscellaneous

·        Encourage communication between participants

·        Maintain both short and long term perspectives

·        Meadow Ranch occupants will be contacted

 

 

 

EXISTING PROBLEMS 

·        Meadow Ranch (impacts on water and livestock movements)

·        Riparian impacts (ie. Doug Fraser’s report)

·        Cattleguard locations

·        Lower Cold Creek Road – will influence fence and corral location

·        Range rider problems experienced in 2002 – plays a critical role in overall management

·        Grazing tenure uncertainty (there is a critical balance between # of AUMs and covering costs of range rider)

·        Flooding variability (surge flows and low flows)

·        Water quality in Hawkins Creek is poor

·        Water seems warmer than in the past

·        Water rights confer no guarantee of water quality or quantity

·        Health concerns noted in water testing, ie. E..coli

·        Historical/heritage sites (post contact) – no legal requirement to protect these sites

·        Wildlife poaching is likely occurring

·        Loss of fish populations, fish species (bull trout) and fish habitat has occurred

·        Need to confirm carrying capacity for cattle

·        Need to confirm timber harvest levels are appropriate

·        Apparent loss of certain types of fish and wildlife habitat, especially larch snags

·        Lack of economic opportunity for community eg British Columbia Timber Sales program

·        2 Areas are of particular concern to the Yahk community:  Cold Creek (because of past flood and channel events) and America Creek (because largely undeveloped to date)

·        Motorized vs. non-motorized recreational activities – how to manage for both?

·        Past impacts of wolves, primarily on livestock.

·        Knapweed and other noxious weeds

·        Lack of specific resource-based information eg ungulate populations, vegetation, red and blue listed species, overall biodiversity, etc

·        Future of Forest Service recreation sites and their management is uncertain

·        New role of government – staff participation in processes like CRMP may be limited; new rules will change administration procedures

·        Overall health of landscape unit and watershed needs to be evaluated for cumulative impacts of various activities (ie. cannot just study one feature in isolation).  Also, assessments such as this need to be carefully tailored to the specific LU/watershed in question and available funding.

·        Influence of Moyie River needs to be evaluated as part of such an assessment

·        Break down drainage into sub-basins as part of this assessment.

·        Need to identify areas of private land at risk of flooding on the flats

·        Note that Ministry of Transportation & Highways is responsible for the main Hawkins Creek Road up to Meadow Ranch.  Salting may be a concern.

·        Lack of information on land use in adjacent U.S.  Contact will be made with the U.S. Forest Service (Kootenai National Forest).

·        There are Forest Health issues in the area, primarily Mountain pine beetle.  Management of large stands of even-aged lodgepole pine is difficult.

·        Forage diminishes on cutblocks over time as areas are reforested (generally greatly reduced in 15-20 years).  Harvesting creates new foraging areas; need to coordinate to some degree.

·        Some trampling damage of seedlings has occurred due to cattle grazing in new plantations.

·        Considerable knowledge exists regarding this area, but it needs to be collated

·        Wildfire suppression, fuel loading, and smoke management need to be given consideration when looking at natural disturbance patterns and ecological issues.

·        Past communication problems have eroded trust to some degree; needs to be rebuilt.

 

 

CRMP RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CHECKLISTS

 

Wildlife/Biodiversity

 

Landscape Unit: 

 

K03 (“Yahk”) – formally established in 1999.

 

Biodiversity Emphasis:

 

“Low” (this does not mean biodiversity is not important; the designation relates to amount of old growth and mature forest requirements).

 

Natural Disturbance Type:

 

Natural Disturbance Type is a function of the frequency and severity of natural disturbances, usually wildfire.

 

There are four Biogeoclimatic Subzones in this unit:

            Montane Spruce (MSdk) – NDT 3 (frequent stand-initiating events)

            Dry, warm interior cedar hemlock (ICHdw) – NDT 3

Moist, warm interior cedar hemlock (ICHmw2) – NDT2 (infrequent stand-initiating events)

            Engelmann Spruce/Subalpine Fir (ESSFwm) – NDT 2

 

Note that some dry sites may actually be NDT 4 (frequent stand-maintaining events)

 

Old Growth and Mature Forest Requirements

 

In “Low” emphasis landscape units, only one-third of the total old growth forest requirement must be identified at this time.  However, a strategy is still needed to demonstrate that the full old growth requirements will be met over time.

 

 

Old Growth

 

Target

Existing

Surplus/

 

Ha (1/3)

Ha

Deficit

ESSFwm

366

12

-354

ICHmw2

129

0

-129

ICHdw

101

0

-101

MSdk

981

588

-393

 

Mature Forest

 

Target

Existing

Surplus/

 

Ha

Ha

Deficit

ESSFwm

1341

1099

-342

ICHmw2

515

263

-252

ICHdw

200

89

-111

MSdk

1942

336

-1606

 

Old Seral Patches have been identified and evaluated by MoF, MWLAP and Tembec, which address the above requirements.  A final decision on old growth management areas is the responsibility of the Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management. 

 

Early Seral Patch Size Distribution

 

In order to more closely mimic natural disturbances (a fundamental basic principle of protecting biodiversity), a much greater range of harvest sizes is recommended, along with a certain amount of retention for structural/vertical diversity.

 

Recommended patch size distribution (as per Biodiversity Guidebook)

 

                                                <40 ha             40-80 ha          80-250 ha

ESSFwm (NDT 2):                  30-40%           30-40%           20-40%

ICHmw2 (NDT 2):                   30-40%           30-40%           20-40%

ICHdw (NDT 3):                     20-30%           25-40%           30-50%

MSdk (NDT 3):                       20-30%           25-40%           30-50%

 

Existing early seral patch size distribution by subzone (Note:  Tembec will provide updated figures – these are outdated)

 

                                                <40 ha             40-<80 ha       80+ ha          

ESSFwm (NDT 2):        778  (37%)               460 (22%)       888 (42%)

ICHmw2 (NDT 2):                   0                                  0         0 

ICHdw (NDT 3):           12    (50%)               12   (50%)      0    (0%)

MSdk (NDT 3):             1395(46%)                804 (26%)      848(28%)

 

Wildlife Tree Patch Requirements

 

The following are minimum requirements for retention of structural diversity.  In large openings, additional retention is desirable.  Tembec’s adaptive management strategy encourages loggers to determine suitable leave areas as they are often in the best position to make these calls.

 

ESSFwm                      7%

ICHmw2                      5%

ICHdw                         5%

MSdk                          9%

 

Riparian Management

 

Riparian Management Area Guidebook contains rules for logging and roadbuilding.

 

Streams:

Riparian class

Avg channel width (m)

Reserve zone width (m)

Management zone width (m)

S2

>5,<20

30

20

S3

>1.5, <5

20

20

S4

<1.5

0

30

S5

>3 (not fish or CW)

0

30

S5

<3 (not fish or CW)

0

20

 

Wetlands:

Riparian class

Reserve zone width (m)

Management zone width (m)

W1 (> 5 ha.)

10

40

W3 (1-5 ha)

0

30

 

 

Range Management Guidebook and Range Use Plans direct livestock grazing.  Everything is changing as of April 1.  The Yahk CRMP group will be kept advised as to new legislation.

 

Rare and Endangered Species

 

Hawkins Creek contains quite diverse wildlife, primarily those which are adapted to early seral (young) forests

 

Lack of inventory is a problem when dealing with rare and endangered species.  If these species are sighted people are encouraged to report it to MWLAP.

 

“Identified Wildlife” refer to threatened and endangered (red and blue listed) species that are identified for active management under the Code.  Yellow listed refers to species which are regionally significant but not endangered when considered in terms of a larger area (ie. province, continent).

·        Grizzly bear – small sub population (10 – 30) called the Yahk Cabinet

·        Goshawk – blue listed – may be getting declassified, as a significant number have been found and they are using a wider range of habitats than expected.  Goshawks have been observed in Cold Creek and in South Hawkins).

·        Badger have been observed.

·        The Tailed Frog has been identified in Screw Creek and tributaries of Yahk River.  It prefers cold water without fish (due to predation).

·        Coeur d’Alene Salamander prefers moist rocky habitat, such as cascading streams.  This has also been observed in a number of areas; not certain if it has been observed in this Landscape Unit.

·        Lewis’ Woodpecker is likely here (blue listed). 

·        Long billed curlew may be here.  Apparently they were seen foraging on Hawkins Creek below the falls 20 years ago.

·         

 

Ungulate Winter Range

 

These are primarily lower elevations critical to winter survival of deer, elk and moose and have been identified on maps.  They include open foraging areas, dense forest cover for snow interception, and other features.  A certain amount of forest cover must be retained:

 

Deer/elk are not generally staying in Hawkins Creek over the winter.  They move to the Mahon face, the States, etc.

 

Moose is the leading management issue for forest cover.  Moose prefer riparian areas and adjacent areas, and do winter in the Hawkins Creek area.  Moose populations are increasing in the region.

 

Generally, if built to approved specifications, impacts of fences are low.  It is generally assumed that, if livestock grazing is to occur, the gain will be better than the loss to the wildlife resource.  Also, fence specifications can be customized for identified needs.

 

There is potential for competition between wild ungulates and cattle for available forage.  Elk are probably most like cattle regarding forage preferences.  Concern was expressed that cattle might be displacing elk from the Hawkins Creek area onto private land and hayfields near Yahk.  It was noted, however, that elk and cattle typically co-exist relatively well in other parts of the East Kootenays, ie. they do not actively avoid each other.

 

Known Critical and sensitive sites

 

There is a mineral lick on the West Yahk River.  This is a posted no-shooting area.

 

Springs tend to have unique plant associations because they are typically in areas where water is isolated and therefore are anomalies in the landscape.  They can also be a good source of water to help keep cattle out of the valley bottoms.  Proposed stock water developments should incorporate measures to minimize impacts to springs.

 

Wetlands typically demonstrate high biological value.

 

Predator Management

 

No specific predator control measures in place.  Wolf control was requested several years ago but MWLAP/gov’t were unwilling to pursue.  Trapping of wolves was encouraged, and a number were taken in the Gilnockie area to the east.

 

Fisheries Inventory and Habitat

 

Habitat impacts noted in particular on Cold Creek, Branch 14 Creek, and Hawkins Creek mainstem.  Some fish inventory work has been completed

 

Survey conducted July-September 1999 - Cold Creek to Main Stem Hawkins to confluence with Moyie River.  Cattle use in parts of Cold Creek, historic fires, cutblocks, roads have all had an impact on habitat values for fish (eg sedimentation, increase in temperature, oxygen levels).  Upper/Middle sections of Cold Creek have portions that go subterranean; warmth of creek is high in sections resulting in westslope cutthroat population impacts.  Competition from Brook Trout is also a concern. At the very end of Cold Creek, pools/riffles have been damaged substantially.

 

Downstream (below 5 km), the Hawkins Creek channel is degraded.  Flooding events and movement of material downstream are damaging habitat components.

 

Fish habitat assessment and channel assessment should be completed.  From this work, prescriptions could be developed. 

 

In 1999, reconnaisance fish inventory survey was conducted for tributaries south of Hawkins Creek road.  Again, fish habitat assessment and channel assessment should be completed.

 

It should be noted that fish habitat assessments should consider bull trout requirements since they were historically in this area.

·         

Hunting

 

This is an important recreational activity.  Some adverse impacts have been noted, such as ad hoc camps and waste, but generally no major concerns.  As mentioned, there is a hunting closure at the mineral lick.

 

Fur Bearers: 

 

The holder of the trapping licence in this area has been contacted and has no specific concerns, but requires ongoing access (summer and winter) and has requested that the habitat needs of furbearers be considered.

 

Generally, measures which promote overall biodiversity will benefit furbearers, such as riparian area rotection, coarse woody debris management, and landscape/stand level provisions for biodiversity.

 

Discussion over potential benefits/impacts of beaver – no agreement reached.

 

Consumptive Use Watershed – Water Use and Licensing

 

Water Use/Licensing

 

There is one domestic watershed – South Hawkins Creek – with a license held by Meadow Ranch.

 

Most water use is through wells on the Hawkins Creek delta.  Some of these are relatively shallow.  There are 30 or so households – 28 with wells (20 to 30 feet deep).  All properties are susceptible to flooding.  The two households not on a well either have a cistern or treat surface water.  Most wells are at least 100 metres from the main channel (closer to the subsidiary channels)

 

Equivalent Clearcut Area

 

ECA’s have not been calculated for the entire Hawkin’s Creek drainage.  ECA’s have been completed on Cold Creek (28%) and Freeman Creek (>30%) drainages.  It should be noted that the ECA’s were completed with old inventory data (1996/1997 data).

 

ECA’s would be examined as part of an overall watershed assessment.

 

Unstable terrain

 

Terrain stability mapping has been completed for this area.  Generally there is relatively little area which is prone to landslides.

 

Sediment sources

 

Sediment source survey should be conducted as part of an overall watershed assessment.

 

The new road up America Creek has potential to be a significant sediment source.

 

Channel stability

 

This would also be a component of an overall watershed assessment.  Particular attention should be given to Lower Cold Creek, the lower channel of Hawkins Creek and South Hawkins.

 

The US Forest Service is planning to do some watershed assessment work on the south Yahk/Yaak River, which includes areas in this landscape unit, ie. Freeman Creek.  They will be encouraged to conduct work in the Canadian portion as well.  Note that some instability has been noted on 18 Branch Creek in the past.

 

Riparian areas

 

As per discussion under “Wildlife/Biodiversity”.  Recreation sites and ad hoc camps are also a concern.

 

Other sensitive areas

 

Meadow Ranch property – The owner has indicated a desire to remain in communication with CRMP participants.

 

Alluvial fan issues

 

Potential for contamination of well water, surge flooding, impact of pipeline, other alterations to fan and channels, increased runoff due to harvested areas and roads.  Contingency planning and coordination of involved residents/agencies is needed.  A field trip will be organized in early spring of 2003.

 

Point source contamination

 

These may include Meadow Ranch, old dump on lower Hawkins Creek, recreation sites, and ad hoc recreation campsites.  An abandoned test well has been observed at 5 km on Cold Creek Road.

 

Health issues

 

E. coli found in Hawkins Creek during monitoring program.  Cattle and feces have been observed in creek at various times.  Wildlife also likely contribute to fecal contamination.  Water consumption, irrigation and swimming present potential health risks.

 

Monitoring –The Interior Health Authority (IHA) will assist with water sampling and analysis.  A priority will be placed on sampling of well water.

·        Residents should be advised of potential health risks – surface water should not be consumed untreated.

·        Shallow wells may be susceptible to surface contamination if their source is not in a confined geological layer

·        Sample for total fecal coliforms (a general indicator of contamination) in wells at the end of May/early June, and possibly additional times through the year.  Could potentially test for E. coli in the future.  However, IHA will not sample surface water.

·        Logistics will be up to the Yahk community to organize.  Interior Health will provide sampling bottles and the community will distribute.  Collection and delivery to office must occur in the same day.  The samples must be received within 30 hours or the sample will not be viable. 

·        Analysis results will be provided to community representatives, who will bring compiled data forward to the CRMP group.

 

Contingency Planning

 

In the event of a water supply disruption, the following should be contacted:

 

Dale Anderson – Forests

Al Pollard – BCTS

Brian Dureski – Tembec

Ron Popoff – Interior Health

Ian Knudsen/Doug Dortman – Ranchers

James Barber/Arnold deBoon (Conservation Officers) – MWALP

Alan Davidson (Regional Hydrologist) - MWALP

Joe Chambers – Department Fisheries and Oceans

Melissa Fuller/Les Halvarson – Yahk Community

Randy Foggin (Foreman) – Main Road (Highways)

Ginny Garner – Provincial Emergency Program (Nelson)

Alanna Romano – Regional District Emergency Program (Creston)

Lawrence Pachal – Trans Canada Pipeline

 

A field trip will be organized prior to spring runoff to inspect the dikes and surrounding area.  Any areas of concern should be brought to that attention of PEP.

 

Note:  Don Low should be invited to represent Ministry of Agriculture at the CRMP.

 

Watershed Assessment needs

 

A watershed assessment needs to be conducted for the entire Hawkins Creek drainage area.  Information from the United States will need to be obtained to complete the assessment, in particular, South Hawkin’s.  Various funding sources will be pursued (FIA, PEP et al).  The Terms of Reference for this project will be developed jointly by CRMP participants.  See discussions elsewhere regarding aspects to include in this study.

 

The lower Cold Creek road will be re-evaluated for its potential to impact on streamflows.

 

Channel stability and riparian condition will be evaluated as part of the watershed assessment.

 

The US Forest Service may be conducting a watershed assessment of the West Yahk/Yaak River and its tributaries (ie. Freeman Creek).

 

Noxious Weeds

 

Concerns noted over impacts of noxious weeds on riparian and upland function, also concern over use of herbicides.  Reseeding of disturbed soil with an erosion control mix is beneficial.

 

Access Management issues

 

Roads and old skid trails can intercept subsurface water and alter natural flow patterns.

 

Human use in a watershed may increase health risk.

 

·        If there is access and values, people will come.  Public access to Crown land is largely considered a right.

·        People need to be aware that all surface water should be treated prior to consumption.

·        Swimming notices should be posted if there are water quality concern.  There are no established beaches in this area.  The big pool at the falls (downstream from the confluence of  Canuck and Hawkins Creeks) is the most popular swimming area.  Interior Health does not test at this site.  Should the community have the resources to periodically sample this site, Interior Health is prepared to conduct some analysis.

·        Concern with recreation stes being de-commissioned in particular outhouse maintenance.  The CRMP group strongly believes that the rec sites in the Hawkin’s Creek drainage should be prioritized by the Ministry of Forests for some degree of continued maintenance.

·        Ad hoc recreation use presents a concern with contamination from human waste.  Education is really the only avenue available for discouraging this type of contamination.

·        Drinking Water Protection Act may include resources for assisting with the watershed assessment in the future.  The East Kootenays continues to have the highest drinking water advisories per capita.

 

Timber/Silviculture

 

Tenures/Operators

 

Tembec Industries Inc. operates north of Hawkins Creek road, B.C. Timber Sales operates to the south.

 

Operable Land Base

 

Extremely favourable to timber production – 85% of the land is considered feasible for logging, compared to 30% elsewhere in the Kootenay Lake District (due to more rugged terrain). 

 

Historical Harvest

 

Logging has occurred since European settlement in the area.  Evidence of old structures and stumps is still present.

 

·        BCTS:

·         80 to 150 ha harvested per year – approx 14 to 20,000 cubic metres per year over the past 15 years.

 

·        Tembec: 

·        196 ha per year between 1991 and 1996 - 45,400 cubic metres per year.

·        111 ha per year between 1997 and 2002 - 26,200 cubic metres per year

 

Seasons of Operation

 

Relatively low snowfall allows nearly year-round operations, except during spring breakup.

 

Hauling issues

 

Considerable traffic, but roads generally in good condition and no major safety issues have emerged.  ATVs and snowmobiles may be an emerging concern.  Radio use is strongly encouraged.

 

Public safety

 

Generally not a concern, provided an awareness remains that industrial activity is occurring.

 

Commercial Tree Species

 

Primarily lodgepole pine, but also Douglas-fir, Engelmann spruce, balsam fir, and western larch.

 

Mill Requirements

 

Tembec is well equipped to deal with lodgepole pine.  BCTS may sell to different purchasers.  Mill requirements are not a major consideration when planning harvest.

 

Forest Health issues

 

The main forest health issue is mountain pine beetle on lodgepole pine.  At present, it is not a major concern.  However, given the amount of lodgepole pine which is 80 years or older, it is likely that it will have a major impact on harvest planning in the future.

 

Reforestation/Silvicultural Systems

 

Natural regeneration is utilized, but nearly all cutblocks are planted as well, to promote a mix of species.  Relatively little “backlog” area (ie. unsuccessfully reforested area) remains.

 

Early Seral (Harvest) Patch Size distribution

 

As per “Wildlife/Biodiversity” section.  A range of cutblock sizes is being created.

 

Soil Protection Measures

 

Grass seeding of roads and landings occurs to minimize erosion and inhibit establishment of noxious weeds.

 

Forest Practices Code guidelines specify a maximum of 10% soil disturbance when using ground based harvest systems.  Another 5% can be used temporarily for trail development, if rehabilitated following harvest.

 

Coarse woody debris is increasingly being left on site to provide habitat for certain wildlife species, and also a source of soil nutrients over the long term.  Back spreading of slash can be done to leave large material for biodiversity, habitat, and soil development.  The specific detail is outlined in the operational site plans.

 

Firewood

 

Considerable opportunity for public to gather firewood in the area, but there is a real problem with people removing wildlife trees (especially older larch snags).  Public education is needed to address this issue.

 

Access Management

 

Licensees need to deactivate/water bar unmaintained roads, to avoid liability in the event of environmental impacts. 

 

 

Livestock

 

Farm Operations

 

Range provides summer and fall grazing.  This allows private lands to be used for intensively managed crops and to provide enough feed for cattle during the period off of the range.

Having cattle on the range allows the range agreement holders to manage their private properties in an optimal manner.  Forage crops improve soil quality and require less cultivation, and are a critical component to crop rotations which also improve soil health, and minimizes pest buildup.  This also allows economic diversity, ie. a number of crops and products can be produced and marketed.

 

Tenures/AUMs

 

There are three active tenures:  Blackmore, Schofer, and Dortman.  Huscroft surrendered his tenure, and Heuston is currently in a non-use situation.

 

Grazing Season

 

Generally June 10 to October 10

 

Range Readiness

 

Surveys are conducted to assess leaf stage and soil moisture.  In general, plants must be at the 5th leaf stage and soils must be dry enough to minimize trampling/compaction and removal of grass plants due to uprooting.

 

Field Trip agreed for early June (Monday would be preferred) to look at Cold Creek, Meadow Creek, range readiness, Murray Meadow, America road.  Possibly pick sites that could be visited annually to note differences in range condition.

 

Seasonal Rotation

 

Cattle movement varies throughout the year depending on forage availability, priority areas to avoid, etc.  Hiring of a Range Rider is critical to allow for consistent management of all cattle.  The contract will be managed and supervised by one member of the Yahk Range Association.

 

Salting

 

Salt can greatly influence cattle distribution.  The salting is utilized to keep cattle in high elevation locations.  Salt will not hold the cattle if predators are harassing the animals.

 

Stock watering

 

ARDSA funding allowed construction of several new watering sources in the late 1970’s.

Additional sites would be helpful at Canuck Creek and Cold Creek.  See reference to “springs” in the Biodiversity/Wildlife checklist.

 

Forage availability

 

Yahk community feels that the stocking rate should be reduced.  However, in order to hire a range rider, sufficient cattle must be tenured to make it feasible.

 

The current stocking rate is not considered excessive by the Forest Service.  The key thing is to manage cattle effectively and avoid concentration in sensitive areas. 

 

Riparian areas must be considered, with emphasis on moving cattle to higher elevations

 

Note that aerial seeding of cutblocks has been discontinued.  Tembec/BCTS do seed roads and landings with erosion control mix.  Pinegrass, which occurs naturally and in relative abundance in places, is less palatable late in the season.  Timber harvesting now has less soil disturbance than in years past which has meant less grass growth.  Slash disposal across the cutblocks may also impact grazing opportunities.

 

Natural barriers

 

Pine stands preventing cattle from movement into Mahon Face MAY be removed in the future due to pine beetle management.  Grazing Licencees should stay in touch with Tembec/BCTS by viewing Forest Development Plans and amendments in a timely manner.

 

Priority Improvements

 

Potential projects which would improve cattle management

·        Water developments

·        Drift fence from America Creek to Meadow Ranch

·        Murray Meadow – rest and temporary fencing

·        Plans for Cold Creek road will influence future developments in this area.  Again – need for a field trip to look at areas of concern.

·        Fence removal on Canuck Creek, and other unnecessary old fences

 

Areas to avoid

 

Intent is to fence or otherwise limit cattle use of riparian areas that have been heavily impacted.

·        Fork meadow – fence improvements and distribution

·        Recreation sites

·        New fence will be installed at Murray’s meadow to avoid use of the riparian area this year

·        Larch plantations are susceptible to minor damage by cattle.  Larch and pine are planted in blocks immediately after harvest, before grass can compete with seedlings.  Most damage occurs near water sources or where cattle trails were located.  Cattle should avoid new plantations for 2 to 3 years.

 

Private Land Issues

 

Meadow Ranch – The landowner has agreed to keep communications open with tenure holders and other CRMP participants.

 

Rollie Kirk indicated that 85 elk have been grazing on 40 ac of his private hayfield, significantly reducing yields.  Could cattle be displacing elk from the range unit?  Ian said that there are usually 40 cattle in Canuck Creek, but very few cattle graze in America Creek.  Sue and Mike stated that cattle and elk are reasonably compatible and will graze in the same area if forage is available.

 

Access Management

 

·        Traffic over cattleguards has caused some damage.

·        Cattleguard was removed from location (in front of Meadow Ranch).  The replacement guard was put up Cold Creek.

·        Highways delay in spring road repairs makes it difficult to get liners in in the Spring.

·        If roads be deactivated, access for rider to get in to distribute cattle will be more difficult.  Wilderness roads may still allow access if water bars are not excessively large.

·        Some cattleguards need to be relocated

·        Request from Yahk community:  Can liners be cleaned more frequently to prevent spilloff from liners onto road?

 

 

Recreation

 

Recreation Sites

 

Forest Service looking to privatize – community interested in keeping the sites operational, but concerned about liability issue.  Information forthcoming.

 

Recreation Trails

 

Most recreational activity makes use of roads.  There are many game trails and other areas used by hikers, but no formal Forest Service trails at this time.

 

Summer Activities

 

Camping, hunting, fishing, hiking, all terrain vehicles.

 

Winter Activities

 

Snowmobiling is popular, as is snowshoeing and backcountry skiing.

 

Motorized vs. Non-Motorized Use

 

Generally, the area has historically been open to motorized use.  Restrictions would be difficult to implement at this time.

 

Commercial Recreation/Tourism

 

The guide-outfitter has been contacted, and expressed no specific concerns.  This tenure may be changing shortly.

 

Members of the Yahk community are pursuing various possibilities along the lines of eco-tourism and related ventures.

 

Historical Sites

 

There are a number of old trails, old logging camps, residual equipment, etc.  CRMP participants should identify these on maps where possible, to make it more feasible to protect them.

 

 

Miscellaneous

 

First Nations

 

This area is part of the traditional territory for the Ktunaxa-Kinbasket First Nation.  Items discussed in this document are without prejudice to aboriginal rights and title.

 

Archaeology

 

An Archaeological Overview Assessment mapping project has been completed.  Several archaeological sites have been discovered.  Development proposals which have significant potential to impact on archaeological sites must be evaluated using qualified archaeologists who may conduct field-based Archaeological Impact Assessments.

 

Border Issues

 

Contact has been made with the Three Rivers Ranger District in Montana.  They hope to do some watershed assessment work on the Yahk/Yaak River, including the West Fork.  Westslope cutthroat trout are their primary concern.  They are interested in looking at the Canadian portion of West Yahk River as well.  The Plan Coordinator will provide them with data summaries and stay in contact to coordinate their project.

 

Wildfire Protection

 

This area is a high risk for large wildfires.  Fire suppression will continue to be a priority for the Forest Service and licensees.  Private landowners should consider minizing fire hazards on their properties.

 

Communication Protocol

 

1)  CRMP participants have agreed to operate on the principle of "good faith".  In other words, everybody has stated that they want to make the process work, and have committed energy and resources to make this happen.  We acknowledge that mistakes and/or misunderstandings are probably inevitable, but are not fatal to the process if dealt with promptly, openly, and fairly.

 

2)  The primary function of the CRMP coordinator (Dale Anderson) is to facilitate effective communication.  Participants are encouraged to communicate directly with each other on an as-needed basis, but the coordinator should be kept advised of significant issues, especially if frustration levels are beginning to rise.  Participants should not hesitate to contact the coordinator at any time if anything is troubling or confusing them. 

 

3)  If participants see someone doing something which seems to be contrary to what has been agreed to, please assume that it is an honest mistake (it could easily be a mistaken impression on your part, as well).  Raise the issue right away (politely) with that person and/or with the coordinator, and we will clarify things.  Please do not involve the rest of the CRMP group until this initial discussion has taken place.  If it is not resolved, then of course the rest of the group will be notified, but it's best to wait until we know for sure what we're dealing with.

 

4)  E-mail.

 

E-mail is a powerful tool, but we've all run into various pitfalls associated with it.  The biggest problems seem to occur when a message which contains mistakes gets sent to multiple addressees, responses are then sent out which prompt additional responses, and pretty soon it resembles an unchaired meeting, only worse.

 

An e-mail sent to one or two people seldom causes this kind of trouble, because any mistakes can be clarified quickly.  However, please be as polite as possible.  And if you make a mistake, don't be afraid to admit it.

 

Another issue is that not everybody is connected - in our group, the grazing licensees are the only ones who do not have email.  This may change soon.  In the meantime, the coordinator will take responsibility for printing copies of relevant emails and faxing them to Ian Knudsen.

 

So, in a nutshell, when using email:

 

1)  Be focussed - do not copy in more people than necessary, and be as concise as possible. 

2)  Be polite - ask for clarification rather than making an accusation.

3)  Minimize use of the "respond to all" function.

4)  Copy in the CRMP coordinator (myself) on any emails you think I should see (probably most of them).

5)  The CRMP coordinator will fax copies of emails to the grazing licensees.

 

The plan document is an important reference, but the most important part of the CRMP process is the agreement to work together to make it work.  That is what needs to be protected, especially in the early stages of a new plan.