Higher level plan recommendations (RMZ objectives)

A successful conservation strategy for grizzly bears must acknowledge the large home ranges, low population densities, and wide range of habitat requirements of grizzly bears across British Columbia. Although the creation of WHAs will assist with the protection of important habitats at the stand level, broader requirements should also be considered during higher level planning.

Higher level planning for grizzly bears begins with the recognition of Grizzly Bear Population Unit (GBPU) boundaries, their conservation status (Threatened or Viable), and their initial population objectives proposed by government. After receiving recommendations from the planning table government will ultimately need to establish a final population objective for the GBPU that incorporates social, economic and biological considerations.

Setting population objectives will require a detailed assessment by government of habitat effectiveness and an assessment of current population status that includes evaluating the impacts of current human activities. This conservation assessment will include careful examination of effectiveness and status in existing protected areas and other land use categories outside of the timber harvesting landbase, as well as the contribution of smaller areas such as riparian reserves, ungulate winter ranges, environmentally sensitive areas and non-commercial cover. A clear understanding for table members of how these areas contribute to the effective habitat in the plan area will result from the assessment.

After the conservation assessment is complete government will develop a series of options for the management of grizzly bear habitat for the planning table's consideration. Options will differ in degrees of conservation risk. Scenarios will indicate a potential for population increase, maintenance or decrease. These options will not include a scenario that results in a population becoming or remaining threatened throughout the population unit. Population objectives should be directed, as a first priority, to the non-contributing landbase, the constrained lands within the timber harvesting landbase and lower value mineral lands. An economic analysis of the potential impact on the allowable annual cut, mineral or recreational development or other important economic considerations will be undertaken for each option and presented to the table. Specific habitat objectives and strategies to meet the range of population objectives in the various options will be proposed and also presented to the table.

The options presented to the table may apply to localized areas within the GBPU and/or may include the potential to establish Grizzly Bear Management Areas (GBMAs). Grizzly Bear Management Areas will be proposed to identify lands with key habitat attributes that further the population objective. Grizzly Bear Management Areas may be proposed to serve one or more of the following:

• to assist with population recovery
• to ensure linkage across major "fracture zones"
• to function as representative benchmarks.

Where population units are threatened with extirpation, a Recovery Plan and its Terms of Reference may be developed and approved by the Forest Practices Code ministries (MELP, MOF, MEM) in consultation with local stakeholders. Recovery Plans are not land use plans but rather will use a variety of techniques to enhance threatened populations within the existing agreed upon land and resource allocations. These techniques may include the temporary prohibition of hunting where it is currently practiced, public education, reduction of bear/human conflicts and other measures. Where it is determined by government that additional effort may be required to recover populations, the process for conservation assessment and option development as suggested for viable populations will be developed through land use planning tables as new tables are created for the population unit in question or when existing plans are revised.

The proposed broad objectives of the GBPUs and GBMAs should be considered for translation into specific land and resource management objectives, strategies and general guidelines by the higher level plan and they must be clearly defined geographically at an appropriate map scale. Planning tables should translate grizzly bear habitat and population objectives into recommended RMZ objectives and strategies.

In summary, the following recommendations are not mandatory, are not to be inferred as government direction and are not intended to have application across the entire planning area. Instead, they should be considered as guidance to the planning table according to the:

1. inherent capability of the land to support grizzly bears
2. current condition or effectiveness of the capable habitat, its distribution and status
   (e.g., if it is already protected or otherwise constrained)
3. the status and distribution of the grizzly bear population
4. all other potential timber and non-timber resource objectives.

These recommendations are based on the best technical information on the species at this time and some or all of them should be considered for application in localized areas of a GBPU where the planning table intends to propose a conservation objective for the species. Planning tables are expected to consider this information along with other potential timber and non-timber resource objectives. If necessary to accommodate other objectives, and to ensure consistency across tables, planning tables should consider restricting the geographic distribution of the recommended management practices strategies and objectives, rather than modifying the practices, strategies and objectives themselves.

Access

• Where planning tables propose a conservation objective for grizzly bears, they should consider application of a variety of access management measures designed to ensure habitat security, minimize displacement from preferred habitat and minimize mortality risk. Access management regimes should be applied over areas roughly equivalent to an average adult female home range, and the practices directed at ensuring adult female security and survival.
• Minimize road densities and road use. Limit the amount of open roads accessible to two-wheel drive vehicles to 0.6 km/km² within highly capable watersheds. Discourage use where possible.
• Promote one-side development (i.e., road construction and harvesting on one side of a valley at a time) to minimize displacement and ensure connectivity.
• Remove ballast from roads across avalanche chutes. Close permanent roads by removing bridges. Remove bridges when permanently deactiviting roads. Revegetate temporary access (e.g., excavated or bladed trails), roads and landings with non-forage species to minimize mortality risk of attracted bears.
• Consider closing access in sub-basins of important grizzly bear river valleys for 50 years after stands reach the free to grow stage (rotate forest activity among several sub-basins).
• Provide windfirm visual screening along roads to provide security (i.e., do not conduct vegetation management or stand tending adjacent to roads).
• Schedule forestry activities to avoid displacing bears from preferred habitat during periods of seasonal use.

Seral stage distribution and silviculture

Where planning tables propose a conservation objective for grizzly bears, they should consider application of management practices designed to ensure adequate forage is maintained across landscapes and through time. Grizzly bear forage supply in wetter biogeoclimatic units is strongly affected by the seral stage distribution on the forested landbase and conifer stocking densities. Mid-seral forest characterized by closed canopies, conifer dominance and high stocking levels have little grizzly bear habitat value because understorey vegetation (e.g., berry producing shrubs) are significantly reduced once the canopies begin to close. Two approaches to maintaining a stable forage supply are recommended: 1) setting specific seral stage objectives for the most capable watersheds within specific landscape units of concern; and 2) varying post-logging silvicultural regimes (e.g., lower stocking) to ensure forage supply throughout the timber rotation.

Table 6 identifies approximate targets for closed-canopy forests in capable watersheds. Values have been interpolated from the seral stage targets for intermediate biodiversity emphasis outlined in the Biodiversity Guidebook. Table 6 is meant to apply to undeveloped or partially developed watersheds. Planning tables should consider recommending these targets as long-term objectives in fully developed watersheds, recognizing that they may not be attainable in the short term because of development history and current timber supply requirements.

• In NDTs 1-3, retain 50% of the largest pieces (top 20% diameter and length) of coarse woody debris in decay classes 1-2.

• Do not use broadcast vegetation management methods in capable watersheds, except where stand establishment or re-establishment is the objective and broadcast methods are required. Vegetation management methods, listed in increasing order of impact on grizzly bear forage are: manual, chemical, cover crops and sheep grazing.
• Do not use sheep, domestic goats or cattle for vegetation management in occupied grizzly bear habitat to reduce direct and indirect conflicts with bears.

Range

• Consider establishing zones where range permits will be gradually removed and no new permits issued to reduce direct and indirect conflicts with grizzly bears. Use the effectiveness classes to decide where to limit grazing.

Restoration

• Conduct controlled burning to improve berry production (e.g., ESSF).
• Plan for extended rotations to recover mature and old-growth characteristics such as more open canopies, greater amounts of understorey forage and/or large trees (e.g., for rain interception in bedding habitat on coastal floodplains).
• Implement thinning and/or pruning to maintain open stands.
• Commercially thin to re-open closed canopies and recover productive shrub understories. Consider uneven spacing to maximize forage benefit.

Preventing human-bear conflict

• Maintain "attractant" free main and fly camps (e.g., camps for tree planters, cruisers, engineers). Ensure adequate food storage and garbage management.

Cross references

Bull trout, marbled murrelet, northern goshawk, mountain goat