Spotted Owl caurina subspecies (Strix occidentalis caurina): Imminent threat assessment 2020

Official title: Imminent threat assessment for spotted owl caurina subspecies (Strix occidentalis caurina). In relation to logging within the Spuzzum and Utzlius Creek Watersheds (British Columbia) 2020

Introduction

Assessment trigger

On October 14, 2020, Ecojustice, on behalf of their client the Wilderness Committee, wrote to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change requesting that he recommend to the Governor in Council (GiC) the making of an emergency order for the protection of Spotted Owl caurina subspecies (hereafter, the Spotted Owl) putting forth the position that logging within the Spuzzum Creek watershed in British Columbia (B.C.) poses an imminent threat to the species’ survival and recovery.

Minister’s obligation

The Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada (hereafter, the Minister) is the competent minister under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) for the Spotted Owl.

Pursuant to section 80(2) of SARA, the competent minister must make a recommendation to the GiC to issue an emergency order if the Minister is of the opinion that the species faces imminent threats to its survival or recovery. Furthermore, it is important to note that the emergency provision in subsection 80(1) is sufficiently broad to permit the GiC to make an emergency order on recommendation of the competent minister in situations other than those contemplated by subsection 80(2). In either case, the GiC is not legally required to accept the Minister’s recommendation, and has the discretion to determine whether to make an emergency order and if so, which activities are to be prohibited. In making this decision, the GiC can take into account not only scientific factors but also the broader socio-economic implications associated with its decision.

This imminent threat assessment was completed in accordance with the draft ^{Footnote 1}Policy on Assessing Imminent Threats under Sections 80 and 29 of the Species at Risk Act, where an imminent threat is one that, without immediate intervention, will render the survival or recovery of the Spotted Owl impossible or unlikely. Under this draft policy, where there is a lack of data or lack of confidence in the data on the species or the impacts of the threat(s), the precautionary-based approach will be applied when conducting an imminent threats assessment, consistent with the preamble and section 38 of SARA, which states that: “…if there are threats of serious or irreversible damage to a wildlife species, cost-effective measures to prevent the reduction or loss of the species should not be postponed for a lack of full scientific certainty.”

How this document is designed

The present decision support tool has been developed to help the Minister form an opinion on whether the Spotted Owl, a species listed under SARA, is facing an imminent threat to its survival and/or recovery, in relation to the logging activities and other potential threats that may be identified in the Spuzzum and Utzlius Creek watersheds in B.C. The tool takes into account the information provided in the draft updated Recovery Strategy for the Spotted Owl caurina subspecies (Strix occidentalis caurina) in Canada (produced by Environment and Climate Change Canada [ECCC], and currently in peer review) “to recover Spotted Owl caurina subspecies in Canada by restoring a stable population of at least 125 pairs (250 mature individuals) distributed within a connected network of habitat representative of all three sub-regions within the species’ historical Canadian range, and linked to the larger population in the U.S.A.” This document includes:

1. information on the species’ status and trends, biology and ecology: provides background information on the species’ status (including population and habitat trends), biology and ecology, a description of threats, and a summary of actions taken by the provincial and federal governments to date (including captive breeding and Barred Owl control)
2. information on the existing and potential imminent threats to the species: provides the best available information on the forestry-related activities (new or evolving threats)
3. assessment of the imminence of the threats: an assessment of the threats to the survival and/or recovery of the Spotted Owl

Section 1: Information on the species

1.1 Species characteristics

The Spotted Owl is a medium-sized owl averaging 45 cm in length and 90 cm in wingspan. Plumage is dark overall with brown feathers patterned by small pale spots over most of the body. The tail has white horizontal bars and there are no “ear” tufts. Eyes are large, dark brown and are set within lighter brown facial disks (Forsman 1981; Gutiérrez et al. 1995). Age classes can be identified by differences in plumage characteristics. Juveniles <5 months old are identified by visible down feathers. Sub-adults (1-2 years old) and adults (>2 years) may be differentiated based on tail feathers; sub-adults have pointed tail feathers with white tips whereas adult tail feathers are rounded and usually mottled in colour (Forsman 1981). Males and females have similar plumage but females are ~15% larger (Blakesley et al. 1990; Gutiérrez et al. 1995).

1.2 Canadian range

The species’ range in Canada is restricted to the province of B.C. Within B.C., the species’ historical range extends from the U.S.A. border north ~200 km to Carpenter Lake, and ~160 km from Howe Sound in the west to the Cascade Range in the east (Figure 1). Within this range, there are three ecological sub-regions that differ in their mean annual precipitation and corresponding habitat characteristics: the wet ‘Maritime’, moist ‘Sub-maritime’, and dry ‘Continental’. Permanent range contraction occurred historically within the Lower Mainland and Lower Fraser Valley, where habitat was lost to human development (Chutter et al. 2004).

Figure 1. Approximate historical distribution of the Spotted Owl in B.C.

1.3 Population parameters (global and Canadian)

The global population of Spotted Owl (‘Northern’ or ‘caurina’ subspecies) was estimated at roughly 6000 breeding pairs in the late 1980s (Thomas et al. 1990), with the bulk of the population (>90%) occurring in the U.S.A. (COSEWIC 2008). Local population declines were observed at 11 demographic study areas within Washington, Oregon, and California between 1985 and 2013, with an overall annual rate of decline of 3.8% (Dugger et al. 2015). With a 6000-pair starting population and a 3.8% annual decline from 1985-2019, the global population would now be estimated at ~1600 pairs. Declines have been most pronounced within sites in Washington, Oregon and B.C., and less pronounced in California (Blackburn and Godwin 2003; Dugger et al. 2015).

Before European settlement, the Spotted Owl population in Canada likely did not exceed 500 potential breeding pairs, or ~10% of the 1980s global population (Blackburn et al. 2002). In 1991, it was estimated at fewer than 100 potential breeding pairs (Dunbar et al.1991; Dunbar and Blackburn 1994) and by 2002 it had declined further to fewer than 33 (Blackburn and Godwin 2003). Surveys of 10 previously occupied sites in 2019 and 2020 found one pair and one single owl at two sites, both north of Hope, B.C. (J. Gillis pers. comm. 2019 and 2020); the reproductive pair is in the Spuzzum Creek watershed and the single owl is located in the nearby Utzlius Creek watershed (Figure 2). This represents an ~99% decline from historical levels, with Canada now supporting <0.01% of the global wild population (of ~1600 pairs).

However, in addition to the three known birds remaining in the wild, there are 26 reproductively-capable individuals (plus two post-reproductive owls) housed in a captive breeding facility (Ian Blackburn, pers. comm. 2020). The combined wild and captive population has been relatively static since 2004, with the wild population continuing to decline (partly as a result of individuals being taken into the captive breeding program) and the captive population beginning to grow (Figure 3).

Figure 2. The two watersheds supporting the three Spotted Owls known to remain in the wild in Canada.

Figure 3. Known Spotted Owl population in Canada from 2004 to 2020 (Government of B.C. 2019).

1.4 Habitat quality and quantity

Habitat requirements

Spotted Owls establish territories (for nesting and foraging) within mixed-coniferous forests characterized by an uneven-aged cohort of trees; a multi-layered, relatively closed canopy; numerous large trees with broken tops, deformed limbs, and large cavities; and numerous large snags and accumulations of logs and downed woody debris (Thomas et al. 1990; USDI 1992). These structural attributes provide: protective cover (from predators and inclement weather); structures for nesting and roosting; and characteristics that support abundant and accessible prey (Blackburn et al. 2009). In moist parts of the range (west of the Cascade Range), these attributes are found exclusively within old-growth forests. In drier parts of their range (east of the Cascades), Spotted Owls have also been observed in younger stands where structural complexity was created by fire, wind events, or disease factors such as root rot or mistletoe infections (Dunbar and Blackburn 1994; Buchanan et al. 1995). Spotted Owls are non-migratory, and so reside on their home range year-round. Nesting pairs may re-use the same nest each year or use alternate nest sites (Gutiérrez et al. 1995).

Like territorial Spotted Owls, dispersing individuals require available prey and protective cover (from weather and predators); therefore, old-growth and mature forests (i.e., the same forests that support nesting/roosting and foraging) are understood to provide ideal conditions and dispersing individuals have been found to utilize these habitats in greater proportion than other habitat types (Miller et al. 1997; reviewed in Buchanan 2004). Dispersing Spotted Owls may traverse a fragmented mosaic of various-aged forests, clear-cuts, roads, and non-forested areas (Forsman et al. 2002). However, encountering these habitat types during dispersal puts the owls at greater risk of starvation and predation (Miller et al. 1997; Hobbs 2004 and 2005). In an analysis of 1534 dispersal events within Washington and Oregon, Hollenbeck et al. (2018) found a mean dispersal distance of 23.8 ± 19.2 km (1 SD).

The approximate area of habitat required by a Spotted Owl pair to establish a home range varies from the wetter to the drier sub-regions: Maritime – 3010 ha, Sub-maritime – 2224 ha, Continental – 1907 ha (Chutter et al. 2004 and 2007). Higher fecundity and adult survivorship is associated with larger amounts of habitat in areas surrounding the nest (Bart 1995; Meyer et al. 1998). The home ranges of the species’ preferred prey, Northern Flying Squirrels (Glaucomys sabrinus) and Bushy-tailed Woodrat (Neotoma cinerea), average ~10 ha in size, so 10 ha has been estimated by experts within B.C. as the minimum habitat patch size within which Spotted Owls can successfully forage^{Footnote 2} (reviewed in Sutherland et al. 2007). In landscapes heavily impacted by forest harvest or other disturbance, residual old-forest patches may not be sufficient to support the preferred arboreal prey populations (Carey et al. 1992). Population modelling results for the species suggest that larger habitat clusters (capable of supporting 15 or more home ranges) are most likely to achieve stable long-term (100-year) occupancy due to the ability for juveniles to disperse within their natal cluster versus having to exit their cluster and disperse across the less hospitable matrix (Lamberson et al. 1994).

In B.C., habitat is classified according to its suitability for Spotted Owl using attributes from provincial Vegetation Resources Inventory (VRI) mapping. The suitability of VRI polygons is classified based on whether they contain all attributes necessary to support all life functions, including nesting/roosting, or only the subset of attributes necessary to support foraging (Sutherland et al. 2007). ‘Nesting’ quality habitat is found in old, tall, low-elevation stands and ‘foraging’ quality habitat is found in mature, moderately tall stands and may extend further upslope. These habitat types double as safe movement / dispersal habitat, with safe movement / dispersal being best supported in landscapes containing contiguous corridors of mature-old forest (Buchanan 2004).

Availability of habitat in the Spuzzum and Utzlius Creek watersheds

There is 5551 ha of nesting and foraging class habitat currently remaining within the Spuzzum Creek watershed (Spuzzum and Urquhart drainages; Figure 2). Based on an estimate of 2224 ha of habitat required (on average) to support a home range in the sub-maritime sub-region, the watershed could support 2.5 home ranges. This is supported by survey records from the mid-1990s to 2000, which showed detections spread across both drainages, suggesting more than one home range was occupied (BC CDC 2019). The Utzlius Creek watershed currently contains 4071 ha of habitat (Figure 2), enough to support 1.8 homes ranges. However, in both watersheds, the remaining habitat is fragmented and many remnant patches are smaller than the provincial expert-defined 10 ha minimum foraging patch size threshold. As a result, the actual number of home ranges that the two watersheds could currently support may be lower. This is particularly the case in the upstream (eastern) portions of the Utzlius Creek watershed, where significant forest harvest has left little habitat remaining; none of the highest quality ‘nesting’ class habitat remains.

1.5 Current use of habitat

Currently, there are only three Spotted Owls known to remain in the wild in Canada: the reproductive pair in the Spuzzum Creek watershed and the single male located in the nearby Utzlius Creek watershed (Figure 2). Spotted Owls have been detected regularly at these two sites since 1994 (Government of B.C. 2019). Nesting was observed at Utzlius Creek between 1997 and 2017, and at Spuzzum Creek between 2017 and 2020 (BC MFLNRORD unpublished survey data). The remaining habitat within these sites is characterized as old-growth mixed coniferous forest meeting the description above.

1.6 Status

1.6.1 Federal protection

The Spotted Owl has been listed as Endangered under Schedule 1 of SARA since 2003. For species under provincial jurisdiction, section 33 of SARA prohibits damaging or destroying the residence of a listed threatened, endangered, or extirpated species when that residence is located on federal land. SARA defines residence as: "a dwelling-place, such as a den, nest or other similar area or place, that is occupied or habitually occupied by one or more individuals during all or part of their life cycles, including breeding, rearing, staging, wintering, feeding or hibernating" [s.2(1)]. Under section 97 of SARA, contravening section 33 of the Act represents an offence. The draft 2005 residence description for Spotted Owl defines a residence as any nest tree occupied by a Spotted Owl within the last six years (with protection applicable year-round) and/or any occupied roost tree (duration/season of applicability not yet defined at the time of drafting this report). There is no federal land within the Utzlius Creek watershed, so federal prohibitions do not apply there. In the Spuzzum Creek watershed, Spuzzum Indian Reserve 1 and 1A overlap with the lowest (easternmost) reaches of the watershed, so the s.33 prohibitions would apply within those lands^{Footnote 3}.

1.6.2 Provincial/territorial protection

The species (referred to as Northern Spotted Owl in B.C.) is afforded some measure of protection in B.C. under the B.C. Wildlife Act (1996), which prohibits hunting, taking, trapping, wounding, or killing the species. The species’ habitat may also be afforded some measure of protection under the Forest and Range Practices Act (2002) through Old-Growth Management Areas (OGMAs), Ungulate Winter Ranges (UWRs), and Identified Wildlife Management Strategy provisions such as Wildlife Habitat Areas (WHAs) and their associated General Wildlife Measures. Most of the Spotted Owl WHAs (including those falling within Spuzzum and Utzlius Creek watersheds) are Long Term Owl Habitat Areas (LTOHAs), which are “managed to achieve 100% Spotted Owl habitat conditions by conserving existing habitat, creating additional habitat, or enhancing habitat to improve quality for foraging and/or nesting” (Josh Malt, pers. comm. 2020). Harvesting for ‘habitat enhancement’ (General Wildlife Measure #4) involves adhering to retention targets and criteria with the aim of maintaining existing Spotted Owl habitat attributes and allowing others to develop more quickly (than under natural succession). The three remaining wild Spotted Owls are found in areas falling within provincial jurisdiction^{Footnote 4}.

1.7 Threats to the species

The Spotted Owl threat assessment is based on the IUCN-CMP (World Conservation Union–Conservation Measures Partnership) unified threats classification system, and was completed on the scale of the species’ historical range. The assessment was completed by a panel of species experts from B.C. in March 2018. Threats applicable to the current population (as assessed within this report) have been highlighted in bold/green, with site-level scores in brackets. Threats are defined as the proximate activities or processes that have caused, are causing, or may cause in the future the destruction, degradation, and/or impairment of the entity being assessed (population, species, community, or ecosystem) in the area of interest (global, national, or subnational). Limiting factors are not considered during this assessment process. For purposes of this threat assessment, only present and future threats are considered. Historical threats, indirect or cumulative effects of the threats, or any other relevant information that would help understand the nature of the threats are presented in the Description of Threats section.

Description of threats

Based on IUCN threat evaluation criteria applied to the entire historical range (i.e., recovery area), there is one ‘very high’ impact threat for Spotted Owl, one threat that is ‘high’ impact, two threats that are ‘medium’ impact, seven threats that are ‘low’ impact, and numerous threats that were evaluated as having ‘negligible’ or ‘unknown’ impacts (Table 1). Persecution, which is a very high threat in the Spuzzum Creek watershed, does not apply to the historical range unless owls are present and their location is publicly known.

IUCN 8.2 – Problematic native species

The Barred Owl is native to eastern Canada but has expanded its range westward and southward and in the 1960s began to overlap the range of the Spotted Owl in British Columbia (Campbell et al. 1990; Dunbar et al. 1991; Livezey et al. 2009a&b). Barred Owls were detected at all 10 of the previously-occupied Spotted Owl survey sites visited in 2019 (J. Gillis pers. comm. 2019). They thrive in a variety of forest types and seral stages and can adapt to more varied food sources than Spotted Owl (Wiens et al. 2014). Barred Owls threaten Spotted Owl primarily through competition for habitat and prey (Dugger et al. 2011); hybridization and predation were hypothesized as secondary concerns (Leskiw and Gutiérrez 1998; Kelly et al. 2004), but this has not been supported empirically (J. Buchanan, pers. comm. 2020) .

In recognition of the severity of this threat, Barred Owl control programs have been initiated within the range of both the American and Canadian Spotted Owl populations (Diller et al. 2016; Dugger et al. 2016; Gillis 2016a; Wiens et al. 2019). American programs have employed lethal removal and the B.C. program has employed a combination of translocation and lethal removal. Results from Barred Owl removal studies have varied with more immediate success at the southern edge of the range and uncertain/slower results at the northern edge of the range. In California, the annual Spotted Owl population growth rate four years after (lethal) removals was 1.029 (increasing) on removal sites versus 0.870 (declining) on control sites (Diller et al. 2016), and in southern Oregon increases in Spotted Owl occupancy and fecundity and decreases in local extinction rates were observed 3.5 years following Barred Owl removals (Wiens et al. 2019). However, in coastal Oregon and Washington, Spotted Owl fecundity and colonization remained low 3.5 years after Barred Owl removals (Wiens et al. 2019) and in B.C., (lethal and non-lethal) removal efforts have not yet been sufficient to offset Barred Owl recolonization rates (Gillis 2016a&b; Gillis and Waterhouse 2020).

Diller et al. (2016) suggested that Spotted Owl populations further north may experience slower recovery following Barred Owl removal because Barred Owl populations are more well-established (so require more intensive and sustained removal efforts to overcome recolonization by floaters/dispersers) and Spotted Owl populations are too small to recover quickly (fewer floaters/dispersers waiting to take up available territories). The supplementation of the B.C. Spotted Owl population through re-introduction may counter this effect. However, even if Barred Owl control is effective, it is unknown whether this threat can be mitigated or avoided to the extent that Spotted Owl can recover without ongoing human intervention (Bodine and Capaldi 2017). More monitoring will be required to determine if and how the Barred Owl threat can be effectively addressed over the long term and thus whether a recovered Spotted Owl population can be sustained in the absence of ongoing Barred Owl control.

IUCN 5.1 – Hunting and collecting terrestrial species

IUCN 5.3 – Logging and wood harvesting

Historical logging practices had severe impacts on Spotted Owl, including direct loss of old forest habitat (loss of nesting, roosting, and foraging habitat attributes) and fragmentation (COSEWIC 2008, Chutter et al. 2004). The primary impact of forestry-related habitat fragmentation appears to be through impacts on preferred prey populations (reviewed in Courtney et al. 2004). This impact is more pronounced in parts of the range where the old-forest-dependent Northern Flying Squirrels are the primary prey item (e.g., Washington and B.C.), versus in areas where the more generalist Bushy-tailed Woodrat predominates (reviewed in Courtney et al. 2004 and Sovern et al. 2014). Additional impacts of logging include the creation of unforested openings within foraging and dispersal areas, which can expose individuals to increased predation risk, and noise disturbance associated with logging operations, when operations take place within 400 m of nests/roosts or activity centres (Wasser et al. 1997, Hayward et al. 2011, USFWS 2006). The conversion of the landscape from old-growth coniferous forest to other habitat types may also increase the exposure of Spotted Owls to their primary predator, the Great Horned Owl (Johnson 1993).

Improved forestry practices on Crown Land under the Forest and Range Practices Act as well as Spotted Owl-specific habitat protection initiatives under the Spotted Owl Management Plans (1 and 2) have partially reduced forestry impacts on Spotted Owl and other old forest-dependent species by requiring or promoting the retention of veteran trees, snags, and riparian areas; reducing cut block size; increasing retention area size; and providing some measure of habitat protection for tracts of old forest through the designation of WHAs, OGMAs and UWRs (Government of B.C. 2009a). However, >180,000 ha of nesting and foraging class habitat within the Spotted Owl’s range still falls within the unprotected portions of the Timber Harvesting Land Base, and harvesting continues to remove and isolate habitat. Further, the General Wildlife Measures associated with Spotted Owl WHAs do not completely prohibit forest harvest.

IUCN 4.1 – Roads and railroads

Spotted Owl nesting habitat falls within low-land forests where there has been increasing concentration of roads for logging and other purposes. Road-building and expansion results in direct and often permanent habitat loss through eliminating old forest habitat within the immediate road surface and managed right-of-way. Roads also expose individuals to risk of collisions (Forsman et al. 2002), and noise disturbance from road traffic can increase individual stress levels and reproductive output (Wasser et al. 1997, Hayward et al. 2011) and potentially alter nesting behaviours (USFWS 2006). Great Horned Owls may also be more prevalent along roadways, putting Spotted Owl at greater risk of predation when roads transect their habitat (Johnson 1993). Road building will continue to accompany resource extraction/development activities (e.g., forest harvesting); however, no new mainline is currently under construction within the species’ range (J. Gillis, pers. comm. 2019).

IUCN 7.1 – Fire and fire suppression

In the drier forests east of the Cascades a legacy of fire suppression has resulted in replacement of fire-adapted understories with flammable ladder fuels that increase the risk of catastrophic stand-replacing fires (Buchanan 2016). Within the American portion of the range, Davis et al. (2016) estimated that 191,900 ha of nesting and roosting habitat on federal lands had been lost to wildfires between 1994 and 2013, four times the amount of habitat that was harvested. In B.C., this risk is most pronounced within the drier Continental sub-region, where fire suppression has likely extended fire return intervals beyond their historical range (Wong et al. 2003). This is likely less of a concern in the wetter Maritime and Sub-maritime sub-regions, where return intervals are naturally longer and fire plays a lesser role in natural disturbance dynamics (Wong et al. 2003). Wildfire risk reduction i.e., fuel load management) efforts also have the potential to impact Spotted Owl habitat directly (through loss of potential nesting trees and the features required to support prey populations) where crews target downed wood (CWD) and snags for removal.

IUCN 1.1 – Housing and urban areas and IUCN 1.2 – Commercial and industrial areas

Historically (prior to the 1930s), urbanization (and associated commercial and industrial development) resulted in broad-scale loss of mixed-coniferous forests throughout the Lower Mainland (Boyle et al. 1990) as well as portions of the Lower Fraser Valley where agricultural development did not predate the urbanization. However, most old forest habitat within the range of these population centers has now been converted to urban areas (Chutter et al. 2004; Sutherland et al. 2007), so this is not expected to represent a significant threat in the next decade.

IUCN 1.3 – Tourism and recreation areas

Several large ski resorts exist within the Maritime sub-region in areas with habitat for Spotted Owl. Expansion of resort infrastructure in these areas could lead to additional, localized, habitat loss. Use of provincial parks within the Maritime sub-region has also increased dramatically in the last decade (B.C. Parks 2018), creating pressure to expand trails and park infrastructure into potential Spotted Owl habitat.

IUCN 3.2 – Mining and quarrying

Mining and mineral exploration activities are uncommon in the Spotted Owl range; however, because they are exempt from the prohibitions on forest harvest under the General Wildlife Measures in WHAs (Government of B.C. 2012), such activities have the potential to cause habitat loss even in areas that are otherwise considered protected.

IUCN 4.2 – Utility and service lines

As with roads, habitat clearing associated with utility and service line construction will result in some direct habitat loss and the linear edge habitats created could facilitate increases in competition and predation. Any Spotted Owls nesting or foraging within the vicinity of utility or service lines during construction or maintenance could also be disturbed by machine noise.

IUCN 6.1 – Recreational activities

Backcountry recreation use has increased dramatically in the South Coast region (overlapping the Maritime sub-region), with visitor numbers at B.C. Parks in the region increasing by 60% between 2007 and 2017 (B.C. Parks 2018). As more backcountry users visit parks and recreation areas where Spotted Owls reside, the potential for human disturbance increases, particularly when activities involve high-noise motorized access (ATVs, snowmobiles, helicopters).

Negligible and unknown impact threats

Eleven individual threats or complete IUCN threat categories were classified as having a negligible impact on Spotted Owl based on limited spatial overlap with the species’ range and habitat and/or no anticipated impacts within the three-generation timeframe.

A further five threats were classified as having unknown impacts.

1.8 Biological limiting factors

1.9 Recovery objectives

The population and distribution objective for the Spotted Owl comes from the most recent draft of the amended recovery strategy (October 2020 version, currently in first jurisdictional review). This constitutes the best information available as of the date of this imminent threat assessment.

To recover Spotted Owl caurina subspecies in Canada by restoring a stable population of at least 125 pairs (250 mature individuals) distributed within a connected network of habitat representative of all three sub-regions within the species’ historical Canadian range, and linked to the larger population in the U.S.A.

The population component of the objective has been carried over from the 2006 recovery strategy. The connectivity and representation components, which were identified as priorities within the 2006 recovery strategy, were added to the updated objective.

1.9.1 Distribution objective

The distribution component of the current updated objective calls for a connected network of habitat representative of all three sub-regions within the species’ historical Canadian range (see Figure 1), and linked to the larger population in the U.S.A.

1.9.2 Long-term population objective

Recognizing the significant work that will be required to recover the species from its current state, the population objective has an associated timeline of at least 50 years. The 50-year objective is to restore a stable population of at least 125 pairs (250 mature individuals).

1.9.3 Short-term statements

Recognizing the long-term nature of the overall population objective (section 1.9), the following short-term statements are provided:

1. to cease human-caused threats that would cause further loss of quantity or quality of the habitat needed for recovery
2. to re-introduce at least 100 captive-bred Spotted Owls back into the wild within 10 years (by 2030)
3. to continue Barred Owl control within occupied and reintroduction sites over the next 10 years

1.9.4 History of recovery efforts

Federal actions

In 2006, Environment Canada (EC) posted the first federal recovery strategy for Spotted Owl, comprised of the provincial strategy (Recovery Strategy for the Northern Spotted Owl [Strix occidentalis caurina] in British Columbia) plus a federal addition containing a partial critical habitat identification, on the Species at Risk Public Registry. Within that strategy, EC committed to working cooperatively with the province of B.C. and other interested parties and stakeholders to post a draft action plan, including a full identification of critical habitat, by June 2007.

Some preliminary technical work to develop a complete critical habitat identification (per the commitment in the 2006 recovery strategy) was initiated by EC in 2009; however, this work was postponed after the provincial government indicated that it did not give permission for information developed under provincial contracts to be used.

In May 2019, further to an exchange of letters with Ecojustice, ECCC committed to produce the critical habitat identification within an updated recovery strategy. This work is still in progress. The updated strategy is expected to be posted on the Species at Risk Public Registry by summer 2021.

Provincial / federal agreements

In 2006, the federal and provincial governments agreed that BC would implement the following measures to address threats facing the Spotted Owl, which had a population of 22 known individuals at the time:

• initiate measures to re-build spotted owl populations. These measures include captive breeding and release, moving spotted owls to new locations, increasing food sources for spotted owls, and managing competing species such as barred owls
• evaluate and revise existing spotted owl management areas to ensure they better protect owls. This will be a collaborative effort working closely with staff in the ministries of Environment and Forests and Range, the Federal Government, First Nations and forest licensees; and
• continue detailed, site-by-site analysis in consultation with Environment Canada to provide an appropriate amount of habitat protection in areas where the 2005 survey reported spotted owls

Provincial actions

Habitat protection, enhancement and stewardship

Management planning

In 1997, the provincial government produced the Spotted Owl Management Plan (SOMP) with a goal of stabilizing (and possibly improving) the population over the long-term, without significant impacts on timber supply and forestry employment (SOMIT 1997). SOMP established 21 Special Resource Management Zones (SRMZs) that included 159,000 ha of areas offering some measures of habitat protection and 204,000 ha of Crown forest land established as SRMZs. Within the SRMZs that fell outside of areas offering some measures of habitat protection, 67% of the habitat was to remain, while the remaining 33% was eligible for harvest using certain prescriptions.

In 2009, an updated version of SOMP (‘SOMP2’) was released, which involved transferring SRMZs into LTOHAs (managed for Spotted Owl caurina subspecies conservation) and Managed Forest Habitat Areas (MFHAs; managed for forest harvest with consideration for long-term Spotted Owl habitat development) and creating updated harvesting guidelines/designations (Blackburn et al. 2009; Government of B.C. 2009a). The requirement to limit significant impacts on timber supply and forestry employment remained. In 2012, the LTOHA areas under SOMP2 became legally designated WHAs with General Wildlife Measures; thirty-two WHAs are now in place to provide a measure of protection for known territories of Spotted Owl (Government of B.C. 2012). These WHAs include both areas where clearcut harvest is prohibited, and only harvest for ‘habitat enhancement’ may occur, i.e. in LTOHAs, and areas where clearcut harvest is permitted subject to conditions, i.e. in MFHAs. A total of 78,485 ha of habitat falls within LTOHAs. To date, no ‘habitat enhancement’ harvest has been undertaken because it is cost-prohibitive, given current market conditions (Ian Blackburn pers. comm. 2020). Experts do not agree that it should be undertaken in areas that already possess the features required to support Spotted Owls (Hobbs 2019).

Additional regulatory measures

In addition to WHAs, other provincial and local government designations^{Footnote 5} offer some measure of protection for Spotted Owl habitat. Approximately 230,000 ha of Spotted Owl habitat falls within these provincial and local government designated areas.

Active population management

Captive breeding

In 2007, the Spotted Owl Population Enhancement Team, an arm’s-length independent panel that was established by the provincial government and that included a federal representative, determined that the wild population was so small and isolated that extirpation was a certainty. Therefore, it made the recommendation to capture either all or a subset of the remaining wild individuals and establish a captive-bred population whose offspring could be re-introduced into the wild after a period of Barred Owl removal activity (Fenger et al. 2007). The provincial government elected to capture only a subset of the remaining wild individuals (6) to establish the captive breeding program and allow a small wild population to persist. The home ranges that owls were removed from to establish the captive breeding program were all designated as LTOHAs at that time. They were then converted into WHAs in 2012, as well as General Wildlife Measures that still permitted conditional harvest (see above).

The Spotted Owl captive breeding program has been in operation in B.C. since 2007. It was initiated with a small and aging startup population and had slow initial success rates and has not released any captive-bred owls to date. However, a now younger breeding population and improvements in husbandry techniques have resulted in higher breeding output in recent years, and releases are being planned in the near term (McCulligh 2019). There are 26 reproductively-capable individuals (plus two retired owls) in captivity (see Figure 3; Ian Blackburn pers. comm. 2020). The intent is to align release locations with operational Barred Owl control.

Barred Owl control

In 2007, the provincial government initiated a Barred Owl removal program, with target sites including active Spotted Owl territories and sites planned for re-establishment through the release of captive-bred owls (Fenger et al. 2007). From 2007-2019, B.C. removed a total of 150 Barred Owls from active and proposed re-establishment sites (Gillis and Waterhouse 2020). Removals were a combination of capture and translocation (at re-establishment sites) and lethal removal (at active sites). One hundred and eight Barred Owls were captured and translocated away from proposed re-establishment sites and 42 were removed from active Spotted Owl sites using lethal methods. The combined removal effort reduced the number of detected Barred Owls initially, but was ultimately not sufficient to overcome local re-colonization rates, indicating that adjustments would need to be made to the program in order for the effort to be sustainable. Moving forward, adaptations to removal methods could improve the effectiveness of Barred Owl removal efforts in B.C. (Gillis and Waterhouse 2020). The augmentation of the wild population through the release of captive-bred owls may also increase the rate of Spotted Owl recolonization of removal sites (relative to areas in Washington and Coastal Oregon where population augmentation is not yet occurring; see Diller et al. 2016).

Inventory, monitoring, and population evaluation

Owl population inventory and monitoring

From the 1990s to 2008, the provincial government conducted inventories to determine the range, distribution, and abundance of Spotted Owls in B.C., as well as to assist in resource management decisions (Blackburn et al 2002; J. Gillis pers. comm. 2019). An organized banding program (attaching unique leg bands) was initiated in 1998 to identify individuals and monitor their movements and habitat occupancy. In 1998 and 1999, transmitters were affixed to several breeding pairs to monitor habitat use and home range sizes (Chutter et al. 2004). Between 2003 and 2014, juvenile owls were affixed with transmitters to ascertain their dispersal movements and overwinter survival (Hobbs 2004, 2005; J. Gillis pers. comm. 2019). Beginning in 2015, inventory/monitoring efforts became focused on revisiting previously known Spotted Owl sites to assess re-occupancy, as well as inventory of sites identified for potential re-introduction through release of captive-bred owls (Gillis 2016a&b; 2017; 2018). Starting in 2016, a pilot program was launched to assess the utility of Autonomous Recording Units (ARUs) in Spotted Owl and Barred Owl monitoring (Gillis 2016a&b; 2017; 2018).

Habitat and population evaluation

In 2007, the Canadian Spotted Owl Recovery Team (CSORT), with the support of Cortex Consultants (under a provincial government contract), developed an integrated modelling framework designed to inform the Spotted Owl recovery program in B.C. and associated habitat management (Sutherland et al. 2007). The framework included models for spatial landscape projection, ecological classification, cross-scale habitat assessment, population dynamics, and reserve selection. This work informed changes / refinements in habitat protection under SOMP 2 (Government of B.C. 2009a and 2019a), as well as the candidate approach for the identification of critical habitat in the 2020 updated draft recovery strategy.

In spite of the provincial government’s significant efforts, which have been consistent with expert recommendations and based on the best available science, the Spotted Owl population has not yet recovered, and its status remains precarious.

1.10 Indigenous engagement and consultations

There are 49 First Nations within the historical range of the Spotted Owl. Three treaty associations have asserted interest in the area, but there are as yet no signed treaties within the species’ range. The Department is also aware of three confirmed Indigenous nations with asserted Aboriginal Rights and Title in the Spotted Owl’s historical range.

The Department formally solicited information for this ITA from Spuzzum First Nation, Yale First Nation, Nlaka’pamux Nation Tribal Council, and Stó:lō Referrals Office. This outreach also served to set the stage for future consultations on the amended recover strategy and for the development of a recommendation for an emergency order, should one be required.

Through public statements and direct communications with the Minister and with the Department, Spuzzum First Nation has sought protection for the Spotted Owl, specifically against the cited threats of logging within the Spuzzum Creek watershed and the removal of Spotted Owl chicks from the wild. Spuzzum First Nation has also asserted that the Spotted Owl is of cultural importance as it is seen as a messenger to the spirit world and is used in traditional medicines.

In response to the department’s outreach, Spuzzum First Nation sent a letter to ECCC on November 30^th, 2020, asserting Rights and Title to their traditional territory, including the Spuzzum and Utzlius watersheds, as well as demanding an immediate halt to logging activities in the Spuzzum Creek watershed and an emergency order to protect the remaining breeding pair. Yale First Nation also responded, indicating that Spotted Owl is rare and habitat limited, and indicating interest in being consulted further if resources could be provided.

Based on this information, ECCC concludes that the Spotted Owl is of cultural importance to Spuzzum First Nation and possibly to other Indigenous communities in the region.

Section 2: Information on the potential imminent threats to the species

Spuzzum Creek watershed

Logging and Wood Harvest and Roads Threats:

Based on updated cutblock information obtained from the government of B.C. on November 3, 2020, there are four active (two still unlogged) and eight planned cutblocks within the Spuzzum Creek watershed (Table 3, Figure 4). The closest planned cutblock (SP066) is within 3.8 km of the 2019/20 nesting locations. This area of SP066 is within the potential home range distance of the Spuzzum pair (the westernmost portion of which extends outside the Spuzzum/Urquhart WHA, into an area where there are no prohibitions on forest harvest). The remaining two active and seven planned cutblocks are within the average dispersal distance of juvenile Spotted Owls. The 2019/20 and 2017 nest sites and most previous detections also fall within the potential noise disturbance distance of the main access road serving all active and planned cutblocks in the watershed.

The provincial government and ECCC interpret threats to the three remaining wild Spotted Owls differently.

The lack of recent sightings to the west of the Spuzzum-Urquhart WHA, B.C. has noted, demonstrates that Spotted Owls may no longer use this area. Because there had been two home ranges within the Spuzzum Creek watershed previously, some of the sightings to the west of the WHA could be attributed to the other home range, as opposed to indicating that the current home range extends beyond the WHA boundary. With respect to noise disturbance, B.C. has noted that the multiple records of nests and successful breeding adjacent to roads and cutblocks demonstrate that logging-related noise does not appear to impact the species.

In the context of interpreting space use by the three remaining wild Spotted Owls, ECCC notes that older sightings are relevant. Sightings have been consistently skewed to the western side of the WHA, suggesting that the current pair’s home range may not be fully contained within the WHA boundaries. Further, since the habitat to the west of the WHA has not been surveyed since 2012, one should not conclude that the current Spuzzum pair is not using this area. With respect to noise disturbance, the presence of nests near roads and cutblocks does not demonstrate that logging-related noise is not an issue. ‘Nesting’ class habitat for Spotted Owls falls within valley bottoms, where the most active mainline logging roads and cutblocks are disproportionately located. Further, most nests recorded within B.C. have been detected via roadside surveys. Consequently, it is possible that the existence of many roadside nests within the database is a reflection of the distribution of nesting quality habitat and of survey methods, as opposed to being an indication that roadside habitats are selected and/or beneficial. Further, if there were “multiple” breeding pairs near roads in the past, and only one breeding pair now remains, it would seem to indicate a negative correlation rather than a positive one. Best available information does indicate logging-related noise induces stress, reduces reproductive output, and may disrupt nesting behaviour in Spotted Owls.

Figure 4. Active and planned cutblocks and associated access roads within the Spuzzum Creek watershed, relative to historical-2020 Spotted Owl detections and nest locations, and areas that afford some measure of habitat protection (WHAs, UWRs, and OGMAs). Detections from call-playback (CPB) surveys are represented as 250-m radius areas to reflect spatial uncertainty of these detections.

Figure 5. Potential impact/disturbance zones for the Spuzzum pair. Their potential home range distance (Table 2) is centred on the 2019/20 nest locations. Detections from call-playback (CPB) surveys are represented as 250-m radius areas to reflect spatial uncertainty of these detections.

Other threats:

Other potential threats unrelated to forest harvest were also assessed within the Spuzzum Creek watershed using publicly available mineral claim and B.C. Crown tenure datasets (Appendix A). Although there are mineral claims and recreation tenures falling within the watershed (Figure 6), status information assessed to-date indicates no active planning associated with any of these claims/tenures. Should new information arise, this analysis will be updated.

Figure 6. Mineral claims and non-forestry tenures within the Spuzzum Creek watershed, relative to historical-2020 Spotted Owl detections and nest locations. Detections from call-playback (CPB) surveys are represented as 250-m radius areas to reflect spatial uncertainty of these detections.

Utzlius Creek watershed

Logging and wood harvest and roads threats:

Based on cutblock information received from the government of B.C. on November 3, 2020, there are three active cutblocks within the Utzlius Creek watershed (Table 4, Figure 7). None of the active cutblocks fall within the potential home range radius of the Utzlius male, which appears to be fully contained within the Utzlius/Anderson WHA (Figure 8). Dispersal potential (for juvenile offspring) is already very limited in the area where the active cutblocks are located. However, most previous detections/nests fall within the potential noise disturbance distance of the main access road serving all active cutblocks in the watershed (Figure 8).

Figure 7. Active cutblocks and associated access roads within the Utzlius Creek watershed, relative to historical-current Spotted Owl detections and nest locations, and areas that afford some measure of protection. Detections from call-playback (CPB) surveys are represented as 250-m radius areas to reflect spatial uncertainty of these detections.

Figure 8. Potential impact/disturbance zones for the Utzlius male. The potential home range distance (Table 2) is centred on the most recent detection point. Detections from call-playback (CPB) surveys are represented as 250-m radius areas to reflect spatial uncertainty of these detections.

Other threats:

Other potential threats unrelated to forest harvest were also assessed within the Utzlius Creek watershed using publicly available mineral claim and B.C. Crown tenure datasets (Appendix A). Although there are mineral claims in the watershed (Figure 9), status information assessed to date indicates no active planning associated with these claims. Should new information arise, this analysis will be updated.

Figure 9. Mineral claims within the Utzlius Creek watershed, relative to historical-2020 Spotted Owl detections and nest locations. Detections from call-playback (CPB) surveys are represented as 250-m radius areas to reflect spatial uncertainty of these detections.

Section 3: Assessment of the imminence of the threats

According to the draft Policy on Assessing Imminent Threats under Sections 80 and 29 of the Species at Risk Act (August 19, 2020 draft), a species is considered to face imminent threats to its survival or recovery if the threats identified will render its survival or recovery unlikely or impossible and cannot be eliminated without immediate intervention.

If the following standardized questions are all answered in the affirmative, it is the view of ECCC that imminent threats may exist. The results of this imminent threat assessment are provided to the competent minister, in order to help her/him form an opinion.

Question 1: Is the species facing new or evolving threats to its recovery and/or survival?

Yes.

In the Spuzzum Creek watershed, two cutblocks will be logged in the spring (harvesting has already occurred within two other blocks in that timber sale) and eight cutblocks are planned for auction, pending additional consultation with the Spuzzum First Nation (Table 3). The harvesting of these cutblocks and road-based removal of the felled timber constitute imminent threats to the breeding pair of Spotted Owls in the Spuzzum Creek watershed. Similarly, the road-based removal of timber from three active blocks within the Utzlius Creek watershed constitutes an imminent threat to the lone male at that site. In spite of efforts made by the province of B.C., the Spotted Owl’s population status has not yet improved, so each new activity that has the potential to impact the remaining individuals (e.g., new cutblocks, and associated traffic) constitutes a new threat to the survival/recovery of the species. This will continue to be the case until the population has recovered (through a combination of successful reintroduction and continued survival/reproduction of the wild population) to a point that it is large enough to be able to withstand impacts at the individual/site level. Given the species’ current precarious status and the fact that no successful releases have yet been made, the planned logging activity in the watersheds, where the last three wild Spotted Owls reside, has the potential to threaten the species’ survival and recovery (see below).

Question 2: Will the impact of the threats make: (a) achieving the recovery objectives of the species unlikely or impossible? (b) survival of the species unlikely or impossible?

a) Yes.

The Spuzzum pair and Utzlius male represent the last (known) wild-surviving Spotted Owls in Canada; if these three individuals are lost, the species will become extirpated. The current draft updated federal recovery for Spotted Owl (currently assessed as Endangered) defines the species’ recovered state as being associated with an assessed status of Threatened. Moving instead to a status of Extirpated would be a move away from a recovered state. Further, these three remaining wild individuals represent potential wild-surviving/reproducing mates for re-introduced Spotted Owls, once re-introduction proceeds. Given the continued precarious status of the population, and that reintroduction of captive-bred owls is unproven and the success of that remedial action therefore uncertain, all remaining individuals, both those in the captive breeding program and those in the wild, are important to the survival and recovery of the species.

b) Yes.

Spuzzum:

In 2019 and 2020, the last remaining Spuzzum pair nested approximately 3.8 km from the location of the nearest proposed cutblock in the Spuzzum Creek watershed (Figure 4&5). This is within the maximum estimated home range radius in the sub-maritime sub-region (Table 2), so the closest proposed cutblock (SP066) could fall within an area traversed by the Spuzzum pair during foraging. Previous Spotted Owl detections within habitat to the west of SP066 (Figure 4&5) show that this area has been incorporated into home ranges of Spotted Owls in this watershed in the past. Further, the absence of Spotted Owl detections in the eastern half of the WHA suggests that this pair’s habitat use is not perfectly aligned with the WHA (which was designed to support one home range) and is instead skewed to the west, into an area where forest harvest is not prohibited. The creation of an unforested opening through the clearing of SP066 could threaten the survival of the Spuzzum pair, should they continue to traverse this area to forage, through increasing their exposure to predation. However, because the area does not include mature/old forest habitat, the clearing of this area is not expected to impact the pair through further reducing prey abundance/availability. The noise disturbance associated with the harvesting of SP066 could also impact the nesting behaviour of the pair (e.g., flushing from the nest, or disrupting feeding of chicks) if their subsequent nesting location is within 400 m of the active equipment (Table 2). Given the proximity of ‘nesting’ class habitat to SP066, this is possible. Further, the main access road serving all the cutblocks in the Spuzzum watershed passes within 340 m of the 2019/20 nest and detection locations and within 320 m of the pair’s previous (2017) nest location, creating potential for disturbance and road mortality with logging-related traffic, should they continue to nest within close proximity of the road. Finally, juvenile offspring of this pair, if not perpetually removed from the wild to support the captive breeding program (as was the case in 2019 and 2020), would be put at greater risk of starvation and predation if forced to disperse across increasingly degraded and fragmented habitat (Miller et al. 1997; Hobbs 2004 and 2005); all of the proposed and active cutblocks with the Spuzzum watershed are within the average dispersal distance of juvenile Spotted Owls (Table 2) and nine out of the ten (that are not yet fully harvested) contain Spotted Owl habitat.

Utzlius:

The most recent detection of the Utzlius male Spotted Owl was 4.6 km from the nearest active cutblocks in that watershed (Figure 6&7). Although this is just within the estimated maximum home range distance for a Spotted Owl in the sub-maritime sub-region (Table 2), this area is unlikely to be used by the Utzlius male, and thus forest removal is not expected to result in habitat loss/fragmentation for this individual, because: 1) there is little Spotted Owl habitat remaining beyond the eastern boundary of the WHA (none of the highest suitability ‘nesting’ class remains), 2) there have been no Spotted Owl detections beyond the WHA boundary (in spite of survey effort), and 3) the cutblocks in the area are not proposed within the remaining small patches of ‘foraging’ class habitat. Further, if the Utzlius male did become paired, either with a previously-undetected wild female or a captive-bred owl, it is unlikely that the proposed logging would further impact dispersal potential for any juvenile offspring in the near- to mid-term, given that the upper portions of the watershed have already been heavily logged and very little Spotted Owl habitat remains (i.e., dispersal potential is already extremely limited). However, the most recent detection locations were directly adjacent to the main access road serving all of the cutblocks in the Utzlius Creek watershed, so there is potential for disturbance and road mortality with logging-related traffic (Table 2).

Question 3: Do the threats require immediate intervention beyond existing or planned protection measures?

Yes.

Provincial WHAs, OGMAs, and UWRs, established under the provisions of the B.C. Forest and Range Practices Act, do overlap both the 2019/20 Spuzzum nest site and the most recent Utzlius detection as well as some additional Spotted Owl habitat further west in the Spuzzum and Urquhart drainages (Figure 3), and within these designations, clearcut harvesting is not permitted (Government of B.C. 2004, 2009b, and 2012). However, some potentially-utilized habitat falls outside of these designations in the Spuzzum watershed, and the logging activity that is occurring imminently falls within these unprotected areas. One of the cutblocks within this unprotected area is close enough to be incorporated into the home range of the Spuzzum Spotted Owl pair. The remainder of the cutblocks within these unprotected areas in the Spuzzum watershed are within the dispersal distance of juvenile offspring. Further, although the General Wildlife Measures in the WHA Orders prohibit clearcut harvesting within the WHA boundaries, they do not prevent road-based disturbance associated with resource extraction activities occurring outside their boundaries. The main access roads servicing all active and planned cutblocks in both watersheds pass through the WHAs, close enough to the most recent detections to cause disturbance.

Conclusion

Based on its assessment of the best available information, ECCC concludes that the Spotted Owl is facing imminent threats to both survival and recovery.

Imminent threat to survival is based on whether there are sufficient individuals and/or sub-populations across the species’ range to ensure the species has a stable or increasing state and is not at significant risk of extirpation or extinction:

• the Spuzzum and Utzlius Creek watersheds support the last three Spotted Owls known to remain in the wild in Canada; if these individuals are lost, the species will become extirpated. Forest harvesting and associated logging-related traffic are known to negatively impact Spotted Owls through habitat loss and fragmentation, disturbance, and mortality. Logging (and associated increases in logging-related traffic) are set to resume in spring 2021. Given the locations of the planned harvesting and of the main access roads in the Spuzzum and Utzlius Creek watersheds these threats have the potential to impact the survival of the Spuzzum breeding pair and their immediate offspring and Utzlius male. Existing protection measures implemented by the province of B.C. do not, in the perspective of this analysis, completely mitigate these potential impacts

Imminent threat to recovery is based on whether the effect of threats make achieving the population and distribution objective of the species highly unlikely or impossible, such that immediate intervention is required.

• The population and distribution objective for Spotted Owl is: to recover Spotted Owl caurina subspecies in Canada by restoring a stable population of at least 125 pairs (250 mature individuals) distributed within a connected network of habitat representative of all three sub-regions within the species’ historical Canadian range, and linked to the larger population in the U.S.A. The species’ recovered state is associated with an assessed status of Threatened. Allowing the extirpation of the remaining wild population is moving in the opposite direction from recovery. The successful fledging of young by the current wild breeding pair, the re-pairing of the lone male, the successful re-introduction of captive-bred owls, and the protection of a connected network of habitat will collectively support recovery towards a population of 125 pairs. The loss of one component may make achieving the recovery of the species highly unlikely or impossible
• Were logging and planned cutblock auctions in Spuzzum and Utzlius Creek watersheds postponed, all of the threats save Barred Owl competition and persecution would no longer be imminent. Were logging in those watersheds prohibited permanently, all of the threats save Barred Owl competition and persecution would no longer be threats. The threat of persecution could be mitigated (to the extent possible, given the location has been made available in the public domain) if the Wilderness Committee and Ecojustice remove the location of the nest from their websites. The threat of Barred Owl competition could be mitigated by continuation (with modification or expansion) of the provincial government’s operational Barred Owl control in these watersheds

References

Bart, J. 1995. Amount of suitable habitat and viability of Northern Spotted Owls. Conservation Biology 9:943–946.

Blackburn, I.R., A.S. Harestad, J.N.M. Smith, S. Godwin, R. Hentze, and C.B. Lenihan. 2002. Population assessment of the Northern Spotted Owl in British Columbia 1992–2001. BC Minist. Water, Land and Air Protection, Surrey, BC. 22pp.

Blackburn, I.R., and S. Godwin. 2003. Status of the Northern Spotted Owl in British Columbia.

BC Minist. Water, Land and Air Protection, Surrey, BC.

Blackburn, I., B. D’Anjou, J. Fisher, C. Galliazzo, J. Jonker, A. Peter, L. Waterhouse. 2009. Best Management Practices for Managing Spotted Owl Habitat – A component of the Spotted Owl Management Plan 2. Prepared for the B.C. Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Forests and Range, Victoria, British Columbia. 118 pp (the “B.C. Habitat Management Practices”)

Boyle, C.A., L. Lavkulich, H. Schreier, and E. Kiss. 1990. Changes in Land Cover and Subsequent Effects on Lower Fraser Basin Ecosystems from 1827 to 1990. Environmental Management Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 185–196.

British Columbia Conservation Data Centre (BC CDC). 2019. Spotted Owl Element Occurrences – Secure.

British Columbia Ministry of Forests and British Columbia Ministry of Environment. 1995. Biodiversity guidebook. Forest Practices Code of British Columbia. B.C. Min. For. and B.C. Min. Environ., Victoria, B.C.

B.C. Parks. 2018. B.C. Parks Statistics Report 2017/18. http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/research/statistic_report/statistic-report-2017-2018.pdf?v=1574372481837

Buchanan, J.B., L.L. Irwin, and E.L. McCutchen. 1995. Within-stand nest site selection by Spotted Owls in the eastern Washington Cascades. J. Wildlife Management 59:301–310.

Buchanan, J.B. 2004. Managing habitat for dispersing Northern Spotted Owls – are the current management strategies adequate? Wildlife Society Bulletin 32:1333-1345.

Buchanan, J. B. 2016. Periodic status review for the Northern Spotted Owl in Washington. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. 22+  iv pp

Campbell, R.W., N.K. Dawe, I. McTaggart-Cowan, J.M. Cooper, G.W. Kaiser, and M.C.E.

McNall. 1990. The Birds of British Columbia, Vol. 2, Nonpasserines: Diurnal birds of prey through woodpeckers. Royal British Columbia Museum and Canadian Wildlife Service. Mitchell Press, Vancouver, BC. 636pp.

Carey, A.B., S.P. Horton, and B.L. Biswell. 1992. Northern spotted owls: influence of prey base and landscape character. Ecological Monographs 62(2): 223-250.

Chutter, M.J., Blackburn, I., Bonin, D., Buchanan, J., Costanzo, B., Cunnington, D., Harestad, A., Hayes, T., Heppner, D., Kiss, L., Surgenor, J., Wall, W., Waterhouse, L., and Williams, L. 2004. Recovery Strategy for the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) in British Columbia. Prepared for the BC Ministry of Environment, Victoria, BC. 74 pp.

Chutter, M.J., I. Blackburn, D. Bonin, J.B. Buchanan, D. Cunnington, L. Feldes, A. Harestad, D. Heppner, L. Kiss, S. Leech, J. Smith, J. Surgenor, W. Wall, L. Waterhouse, and L.

Williams, 2007. Guidance and some components of action planning for the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) in British Columbia. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Victoria, British Columbia. 92 pp.

Colombie-Britannique, ministère des Forêts et ministère de l’Environnement. 1995. Biodiversity guidebook. Forest Practices Code of British Columbia. Ministère des Forêts et ministère de l’Environnement de la Colombie-Britannique, Victoria (C.‑B.).

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 2008. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis Caurina) subspecies, in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 48 pp. www.SARAregistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm

Courtney, S.P., J.A. Blakesley, R.E. Bigley, M.L. Cody, J.P. Dumbacher, R.C. Fleischer, A.B. Franklin, J.F. Franklin, R.J. Gutierrez, J.M. Marzluff, and L. Sztukowski. 2004. Scientific evaluation of the status of the Northern Spotted Owl. Sustainable Ecosystems Institute, Portland, Oreg. http://www.sei.org/owl/finalreport/finalreport.htm

Davis, R.J., Hollen, B., Hobson, J., Gower, J.E. and D. Keenum. 2016. Northwest Forest Plan—the first 20 years (1994–2013): status and trends of northern spotted owl habitats. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-929. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 111 p.

Diller L.V., K.A. Hamm, E.A. Desiree, K.M. Dugger, C.B. Yackulic, C.J. Schwarz, P.C. Carlson, and T.L. McDonald. 2016. Demographic Response of Northern Spotted Owls to Barred Owl Removal. Journal of Wildlife Management 80(4): 1-17. DOI: 10-1002/jwmg.1046.

Dugger, K.M., E.D. Forsman, A. B. Franklin, R.J. Davis, G.C. White, C.J. Schwarz, K.P. Burnham, J.D. Nichols, J.E. Hines, C. B. Yackulic, P.F. Doherty Jr., L. Bailey, D.A. Clark, S.H. Ackers, L.S. Andrews, B. Augustine, B. L. Biswell, J. Blakesley, P.C. Carlson, M. J. Clement, L.V. Diller, E.M. Glenn, A. Green, S.A. Gremel, D.R. Herter, J.M. Higley, J. Hobson, R.B. Horn, K.P. Huyvaert, C. McCafferty, T. McDonald, K. McDonnell, G.S. Olson, J. A. Reid, J. Rockweit, V. Ruiz, J. Saenz and S.G. Sovern. 2015. The effects of habitat, climate, and Barred Owls on long-term demography of Northern Spotted Owls. The Condor 118(1), 57-116.

Dunbar, D., Booth, B., Forsman, E., Hetherington, A., and D. Wilson. 1991. Status of the Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis) and Barred Owl (Strix varia) in southwestern British Columbia. Canadian Field-Naturalist 105:464–468.

Dunbar, D., and I. Blackburn. 1994. Management options for the Northern Spotted Owl in British Columbia. Report of the Canadian Spotted Owl Recovery Team. BC Minist. Environ. Lands and Parks, Surrey, BC. 180pp.

Fenger, M., J.B. Buchanan, T.J. Cole, E.D. Forsman, S.M. Haig, K. Martin, and W.A. Rapley. 2007. BC Ministry of Forests, Land, Natural Resource Operations, Surrey, BC. Spotted Owl Population Enhancement Team, Government of British Columbia pp 1-50.

Forsman, E.D. 1981. Molt of the Spotted Owl. Auk: 98:735-742.

Forsman, E.D., R. G. Anthony, J. A. Reid, P. J. Loschl, S. G.Sovern, M. Taylor, B. L. Biswell, A. Ellingson, E. C. Meslow, G. S.Miller, K. A. Swindle, J. A. Thrailkill, F. F. Wagner and D. E. Seaman. 2002. Natal and breeding dispersal of northern spotted owls. Ecological Monographs 149: 1-35.

Gillis, J. 2016a. The Enhancement of Spotted Owl Habitats by Removing Competition Effects Associated with Barred Owls. Project HSP7141. Final Report prepared for the Habitat Stewardship Program. Prepared by B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

Gillis, J. 2016b. Restoration of the Lillooet Sub-Population of spotted owls in British Columbia - Final Report Project 16.W.BRG.13. Prepared for the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program by BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

Gillis, J. 2017. Restoration of the Lillooet Sub-Population of spotted owls in British Columbia - Final Report Project COA-F17-W-1314. Prepared for the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program by BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

Gillis, J. 2018. Restoration of the Lillooet Sub-Population of spotted owls in British Columbia. Final Report Project COA-F18-2409. Prepared for the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program by BC Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

Gillis, J. and F.L. Waterhouse. 2020. Barred Owl removal report 2007–2016. Prov. B.C., Victoria, B.C. Tech. Rep. 128. www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Tr/Tr128.htm

Government of British Columbia. 2004. Order Establishing Provincial Non-Spatial Old Growth Objectives. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/farming-natural-resources-and-industry/natural-resource-use/land-water-use/crown-land/land-use-plans-and-objectives/policies-guides/old_growth_order_may18th_final.pdf

Government of British Columbia. 2009a. British Columbia 2009 Spotted Owl Management Plan (SOMP 2): Rationale for Revisions to the 1997 Spotted Owl Management Plan (SOMP 1). https://www2.gov.B.C..ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/resource-stewardship-tools/sbot/somp2.pdf

Government of British Columbia. 2009b. Order – Ungulate Winter Range U-2-006. http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/uwr/u-2-006_order_22Sep09.pdf

Government of British Columbia. 2012. Order – Wildlife Habitat Areas 2-494 to 2-510. http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/documents/wha/SPOW_2-494-510_Order.pdf

Government of British Columbia. 2019. Stewardship Baseline Objectives Tool (SBOT) – version 1.1 - DRAFT. https://governmentofbc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=8e015f61714c410f93ab8f16ce714ae5

Gutiérrez, R. J., A. B. Franklin, and W. S. Lahaye. 1995. Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis), version 2.0. In the Birds of North America (A. F. Poole and F. B. Gill, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bna.179

Hayward, L. S., A. Bowles, J. C. Ha, and S. K. Wasser. 2011. Impacts of acute and long-term vehicle exposure on

Hayward, L. S., A. Bowles, J. C. Ha, and S. K. Wasser. 2011. Impacts of acute and long-term vehicle exposure on

Hanson, E., D.W. Hays, L. Hicks, L. Young, and J. Buchanan. 1993. Spotted Owl habitat in Washington. Washington Forest Practices Board. Washington. 115pp

Hayward, L. S., A. Bowles, J. C. Ha, and S. K. Wasser. 2011. Impacts of acute and long-term vehicle exposure on physiology and reproductive success of the northern spotted owl. Ecosphere 2(6):art65. doi:10.1890/ES10-00199.1

Hobbs, J., 2004. Spotted Owl Nest Site Descriptions (2002 and 2003) and Telemetry and Monitoring of Juvenile Spotted Owls (2003 and 2004). Internal report Prepared for Biodiversity Branch, Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. 38 pp.

Hobbs, J., 2005. Spotted Owl Inventory and Nest Site Descriptions (2004) and Telemetry and Monitoring of Juvenile Spotted Owls (2004 and 2005). Internal report Prepared for Biodiversity Branch, Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. 40 pp.

Hobbs, J. 2019. Spotted Owl Survival and Recovery in British Columbia: Expert Report. Prepared for Wilderness Committee.

Kelly, E. G., and E. D. Forsman. 2004. Recent records of hybridization between barred owls (Strix varia) and northern spotted owls (S. occidentalis caurina). Auk 121:806–810.

Lamberson, R.H., B.R. Noon, C. Voss, and R. McKelvey. 1994. Reserve design for terrestrial species: The effects of patch size and spacing on the viability of the Northern Spotted Owl. Conservation Biology 8:185–195.

Leskiw, T. and R.J. Gutiérrez. 1998. Possible predation of a spotted owl by a barred owl. Western Birds 29(3):225-226.

Livezey, K.B. 2009a. Range Expansion of barred owls, Part I: Chronology and Distribution. The American Midland Naturalist. Vol. 161, No. 1, pp. 49-56.

Livezey, K.B. 2009b. Range Expansion of barred owls, Part II: Facilitating Ecological Changes. The American Midland Naturalist. Vol. 161, No. 2, pp. 323-349.

McCulligh, J. 2019. Northern Spotted Owl Captive Breeding Program: Final Report for 2018/2019 - Project No. COA-F19-W-2676. Prepared for the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program.

Meyer, J.S., L.L. Irwin, and M.S. Boyce. 1998. Influence of habitat abundance and fragmentation on Northern Spotted Owls in western Oregon. Wildlife Monographs 139:1–51.

Sovern, S.G., Forsman, E.D., Olson, G.S., Biswell, B.L., Taylor, M., and R.G. Anthony. 2014. Barred Owls and Landscape Attributes Influence Territory Occupancy of Northern Spotted Owls. The Journal of Wildlife Management 78(8): 1436-1443.

Spotted Owl Management Inter-Agency Team (SOMIT). 1997. Spotted Owl management plan: Strategic component. B.C. Minist. Environment, Lands and Parks and B.C. Minist. Forests, Victoria, BC. 81pp.

Sutherland, G.D., D. O'Brien, A. Fall, F.L. Waterhouse, A. Harestad, and J.B. Buchanan (editors). 2007. A framework to support landscape analyses of habitat supply and effects on populations of forest-dwelling species: a case study based on the Northern Spotted Owl. Technical Report 038. British Columbia Ministry of Forests and Range, Research Branch, Victoria, British Columbia. https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/pubs/Docs/Tr/Tr038.pdf

Thomas, J.W., E.D. Forsman, J.B. Lint, E.C. Meslow, B.R. Noon, and J. Verner. 1990. A Conservation Strategy for the Northern Spotted Owl. Rep. of Interagency Scientific Committee to Address the Conservation of the Northern Spotted Owl (Portland, OR) 427pp + maps.

U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI). 1992. Recovery plan for the Northern Spotted Owl: Draft. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC. 662pp + maps.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2006. Guidance: Estimating the Effects of Auditory and Visual Disturbance on Northern Spotted Owls and Marbled Murrelets in Northern California. https://www.fws.gov/arcata/es/birds/nso/documents/MAMU-NSO%20Harassment%20Guidance%20NW%20CA%202006Jul31.pdf

Wasser, S.K., K. Bevis, G. King, and E. Hanson. 1997. Noninvasive Physiological Measures of Disturbance in the Northern Spotted Owl. Conservation Biology 11:4, 1019-1022. https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1997.96240.x

Wiens, J.D., R.A. Anthony, and E.D. Forsman. 2014. Competitive interactions and resource partitioning between northern spotted owls and barred owls in western Oregon. Wildlife Monographs 185: 1-50.

Wiens, J.D., Dugger, K.M., Lesmeister, D.B., Dilione, K.E., and Simon, D.C. 2019. Effects of Barred Owl (Strix varia) removal on population demography of Northern Spotted Owls (Strix occidentalis caurina) in Washington and Oregon, 2015–18: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2019-1074, 17 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20191074.

Personal communications

Ian Blackburn. Manager, Resource Stewardship for Ecosystems - B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. 2020.

Joel Gillis. Spotted Owl Biologist – B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. Personal Communication. 2019.

Joel Gillis. Spotted Owl Biologist – B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. Personal Communication. 2020.

Joseph Buchanan. Wildlife Biologist – Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2020.

Josh Malt. Section Head: Terrestrial Wildlife Resources – B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. Personal Communication. 2020.

Louise Waterhouse. Research Wildlife Habitat Ecologist - B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. Personal Communication. 2019.

Nicola Bickerton. Senior Wildlife Biologist - B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. Personal Communication. 2019.

Annexes

Appendix A: Work-in progress summary of GIS analysis and socio-economic research for select watersheds Spotted Owl

By: Economic Analysis Directorate, Strategic Policy Branch, ECCC

Draft date: November 2 2020