EFFECTS ON WILDLIFE
STANDARD OF REVIEW
According to the CBJ Mining Ordinance, CBJ 49.65.135(a)(1), the CBJ shall require that:
The CBJ Land Use Ordinance, CBJ 49.70.310 (a) specifies that development is prohibited:
(3) Within fifty feet of an eagle nest on private land, provided that there shall be no construction within three hundred thirty feet of such nest between March 1st and August 31st if it contains actively nesting eagles;"
The CBJ Comprehensive Plan (1996) states that:
Policy 3.8 It is a policy of the CBJ to protect areas surrounding identified eagle nests from conflicting land uses.
Also, the habitat section of the Juneau Coastal Management Program (JCMP), found at CBJ 49.70.950(b), states that off shore areas, estuaries, wetlands and tide flats, rocky islands and seacliffs, barrier islands and lagoons, exposed high energy coasts, rivers, streams and lakes, and important upland habitat:
The JCMP also contains further standards for management of specific areas. Habitats relevant to this particular project are:
49.70.950(c)(3) "Wetlands and tide flats shall be managed so as to assure adequate water flow, nutrients, and oxygen levels, to avoid the adverse effects on natural drainage patterns, the destruction of important habitat, and the discharge of toxic substances;"
49.70.950(c)(4) "Rocky islands and seacliffs shall be managed so as to avoid the harassment of wildlife, the destruction of important habitat, and the introduction of competing or destructive species and predators;"
49.70.950(c)(6) "High-energy coasts shall be managed so as to assure the. adequate mix and transport of sediments and nutrients and avoid redirection of transport process and wave energy;" and
49.70.950(c)(7) "Rivers, streams and lakes shall be managed so as to protect natural vegetation, water quality, important fish or wildlife habitat and natural water flow."
The JCMP, at CBJ 49.70.950(d), also states that:
(2) There is no feasible and prudent alternative to meet the public need for the proposed use or activity which would conform to the standards contained in subsections (b) and (c) of this section; and
(3) All feasible and prudent steps to maximize conformance with the standards contained in subsections (b) and (c) of this section will be taken."
This staff report examines the potential impacts that the Kensington mine might have on wildlife occurring in the vicinity. Wildlife habitat loss and the potential for contact between wildlife and mine solid waste or employees are discussed. The potential impacts of noise and transportation activities on wildlife are considered briefly here and in more detail in the staff reports on Noise and Transportation. A proposed monitoring program for mountain goats is discussed in this report since it is related to potential impacts broader than just noise.
BACKGROUND
Wildlife species in the Kensington project area that State and federal wildlife agencies have indicated may be sensitive to the proposed mine development include mountain goats, black and brown bear, gray wolf (not common at the project site), mink, bald eagles, and Vancouver Canada geese. These species are considered to be "Management Indicator Species" for the Tongass National Forest, meaning that the health of these populations is viewed as an indicator of the relative health of the forest ecosystem. These species have received the greatest attention in the baseline information prepared for the mine project. Mitigation and monitoring proposed by Coeur and resource agencies generally target the potential for impacts on some of these species.
Species that occur within the project area and are listed as endangered or threatened include the American peregrine falcon (endangered), humpback whale (endangered), and Stellar sea lion (threatened). The American peregrine falcon occurs as a migrant in Lynn Canal, and is not expected to be affected by development of this project. A non-migratory peregrine falcon, Peales', may nest in Lynn Canal but is not listed as threatened or endangered.
The following issues are identified in the Final SEIS (1997) [which refers to the Final EIS (1992)], the Amended Plan of Operations (June 1996), other project documents, and in comments from state and federal wildlife agencies as the primary potential impacts of the project on wildlife:
o Terrestrial habitat for mountain goat and black bear will be lost at the project site.
o Potential adverse effects on humpback whale populations, from accidental contact with barge traffic or from bioaccumulation of diesel fuel contaminates.
o Black bear may be attracted to camp facilities and the domestic solid waste disposal site and risk being killed by camp personnel in defense of life or property.
o The presence of project personnel in areas inhabited by wildlife may lead to purposeful or inadvertent harm to wildlife.
Coeur has proposed mitigation measures and monitoring related to each of these wildlife issues. The Final SEIS refers to measures that are found in the Final EIS (pages 2-60 and 2-67) and the Amended Plan of Operations (August 1997; pages 3-37 to 3-39, and 4-7). The mitigation measures and wildlife monitoring activities proposed by the company are listed here and are part of the overall project description to which Coeur will be held.
Kensington Project Description synopsis related to Fish and Wildlife Protection
o Signs will be posted in conspicuous places that inform employees and contractors of all applicable laws and regulations governing hunting fishing and trapping.
o Employees will be strictly prohibited from feeding animals or leaving edible materials in construction zones of work areas.
o Employees will not be permitted to have firearms on-site; hunting will be prohibited on the project properties (firearm use will be limited to defense of life or property).
o Coeur will cooperate with enforcement agencies by taking strong disciplinary action against any employee violating company policies or local fish and game regulations, including the termination of an employee convicted of violating a major fish and game regulation at the mine site or associated Coeur controlled land holdings for the project.
o Protect terrestrial wildlife and big game by erecting fencing around those areas deemed to be hazardous.
o Construct power poles using raptor proof design details.
o Determine and monitor noise levels of various project activities.
o Insulate generator power plant adequately to minimize noise impacts to mountain goats.
o Implement a bear and garbage management plan in coordination with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG).
o Develop guidelines for helicopter use near sensitive goat habitat.
o Evaluate raptor nesting sites to assess protective measures. Follow U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requirement for a 330 foot buffer zone around bald eagle nests.
o Maintain stream flows to provide minimum instream flow requirement necessary to support existing resident and anadromous fisheries.
o Monitor noise and behavioral responses of mountain goats during project construction and periodically during operation.
o Observe bald eagle nest sites and sea lion haulouts to determine if nests or haulouts are being abandoned.
o Conduct on-going stabilization and revegetation of disturbed areas during project construction and operation.
o Develop long-term revegetation measures to improve wildlife habitat, such as thinning of second-growth forest in reclaimed areas.
ANALYSIS
Noise, Activity and Disturbance
Noise and activity associated with the project may disturb wildlife in the project area and cause changes in wildlife occurrence and distribution. Noise disturbances may include helicopter use, milling, blasting, hauling, construction, and other activity associated with the mine and camp. The staff report on Noise examines the potential impacts of noise on wildlife and mitigating measures in detail. This report briefly considers the impacts in light of previous studies and discusses proposed monitoring efforts.
Mountain Goats. Helicopter flights to the site will generate noise that could disturb and displace mountain goats. The Final EIS (1992; page 4-69) indicates that noise from mine construction, operation, and helicopter use would be expected to displace mountain goats from portions of their range near the project area. However, the Hart Crowser (1997) noise simulation study concludes that predicted mine site noise levels fall within CBJ standards in most cases and that the small amount of additional noise created by Kensington mine-related flights would not be expected to have a measurable effect on mountain goat populations near the flight corridor. To address the noise concern, the Amended Plan of Operation (August 1997) states that employees will be routinely trucked from the heliport on the beach to the housing camp, although the company has expressed interest in having the flexibility to occasionally land helicopters at the mine process area as needed in the event of weather or emergency conditions.
The Effects of Kensington Mine Development on Black Bears and Mountain Goats (July 1996), a wildlife baseline study and monitoring plan prepared by ADFG, indicates that continuing the level of monitoring conducted under that study is not likely to produce adequate information to determine specific cause and effect relationships between mountain goat movement patterns/population and mineral development. The Final SEIS recommends that mountain goat be monitored to determine population trends over the life of the mine. Coeur and ADFG, , in consultation with the U.S. Forest Service and CBJ staff, have developed a revised approach to monitor mountain goats which calls for subsequent analysis and appropriate mitigation if a measurable decline in the goat population occurs.
A mountain goat monitoring and mitigation plan will be included in the company's Plan of Operations approved by the U.S. Forest Service. The general monitoring and mitigation approach would be as follows:
2. Population Change. The first two or three years of surveys would provide a benchmark for the existing mountain goat population. If a declining population trend is observed over a few years, the company will seek agency input into a general examination of the goat population and mine activities to determine if practices should be modified in the short term. With the proposed survey method, the agencies and Coeur agree that a 50 percent decline in goat sightings during the life of the mine would trigger concern that a significant drop in goat numbers has occurred.
An analysis would occur to attempt to determine the reasons for the decline in the mountain goat population. ADFG would examine the survey data to determine goat sightability rates, an absence of a particular age class, goat distribution, and habitat usage as well as comparable goat survey data collected from other undisturbed areas in the region. The results of this analysis could lead to immediate steps by the company to modify mine activities as they affect goats or, if at mine closure, a further assessment of the likelihood of success of a mountain goat transplant effort.
3. Assessment of Transplanting. In the case of a significant population decline, the likelihood of a successful goat replanting would be assessed by ADFG. An assessment would occur at mine closure and would examine then-current conditions including:
o an examination of the remaining goats on Lion's Head Mountain to determine their general health;
o an examination of donor goat subpopulations in the region (i.e., Katzehin River, Endicott River, Berners Bay, and William Henry Mountain areas) to determine whether they could provide tranplants without being depleted;
o a review of the status of mountain goats in Southeast Alaska to understand the Lion's Head Mountain subpopulation trend within a broader regional context;
o a review of other reports and studies then available on mountain goats (for example, on disease, goat behavior and helicopter traffic areas, etc.).
Black Bear response to noise and disturbance from mining activities has not been monitored in southeast Alaska. The potential for displacement and possible displacement distances are not known. Monitoring at the Kensington site, conducted since 1990, indicates that bears have continued to use the area around the camp and mine portal during exploration activities. The telemetry work on collared bears (see Effects of Kensington Mine Development on Black Bears and Mountain Goats, July 1996) indicates a high density of black bears, and that denning occurs within the project area. Further monitoring is not planned because it will probably not produce additional useful information. Rather, Coeur will work closely with the U.S. Forest Service and ADFG to reduce impacts from the development. Attention will be paid to food handling and garbage disposal. Wet garbage will be specifically collected each day from each area of the site and taken to the well-fenced incinerator.
Bald Eagle nest trees occur along the coast line near the project area. While no nest trees will be lost due to project construction and operation, eagles may be disturbed by helicopter and other project noise. Coeur will follow the requirements of the interagency agreement between the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to prohibit construction near active eagle nest trees and to minimize noise disturbance to the eagles.
A small population of Stellar sea lions, listed as endangered, haul out and feed in the area of Point Sherman. Low-level helicopter flights or barges in the vicinity could cause abandonment of these sites by sea lions if no effort is made to avoid disturbance. The maintenance of a buffer between project activity (particularly barge traffic) and haulouts will likely be necessary to avoid harassment, which is prohibited under the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act. The staff report on Transpiration considers the issue of barge traffic and sea lions in more detail.
Humpback whales, listed as endangered, are seasonally present adjacent to the project site. The Southeast Alaska herd represents between 29 and 372 individuals. This herd is geographically segregated from other Alaska herds in Prince William Sound and the western Gulf of Alaska coastline. Although the exact numbers of whales in Lynn Canal is unavailable, they are known to occur in the summer to fall feeding season. Humpback whales have been observed feeding off Point Sherman from April through June (Nanney, 1990). Important feeding areas include Glacier Bay, adjacent portions of Icy Strait, Frederick Sound and Stephens Passage. Each year concentrations of feeding whales are found in different areas. Their distribution in Alaskan waters is variable. Adverse impacts could come from accidental whale/vessel collisions, displacement due to traffic or noise from vessel traffic, or from introduction of trace metals through direct uptake of contaminated prey or direct ingestion of contaminates after accidental spills. The potential for bioaccumulation of contaminates is judged to be low because large feeding herds are not often seen in Lynn Canal. Direct collision or displacement conflicts are at a minimum due to the consistent and relatively slow speeds of barge traffic, and to the large geographical area involved with a small whale population to absorb.
Wildlife Habitat Loss
The Final SEIS (page 4-65) indicates that surface disturbance due to development of the proposed project will result in the loss of a total of about 270 acres of forest, wetland, and alpine habitat types. Approximately 73 acres of old growth forest habitat would be removed in the preferred alternative. The clearing of existing vegetation and replacement with mine facilities will result in the long-term alteration of existing wildlife habitats. About 165 acres of wetland acres associated with the dry tailings facility and mine process site would be permanently lost.
The Final SEIS (which refers to the Final EIS) uses habitat capability models to estimate the potential reduction of various big game, small mammal, and bird populations due to the direct loss of habitat from construction of mine facilities. For example, for the preferred alternative, the Final EIS (page 4-69) projected a reduction of nine to ten goats from the estimated population of 17 animals that can be supported by the habitat within a three mile radius of the mine site. For black bear populations, the Final EIS (page 4-70) projected a reduction of eight bears from the currently estimated population of 16 animals within a three mile radius of the mine site. These estimated changes in population are based solely on the actual loss of habitat due to the construction of mine facilities (Final EIS, page 4-65). As discussed above, additional population reduction or displacement may also occur in wildlife species that are sensitive to noise and disturbance, such as mountain goats.
The restoration of wildlife habitat at the project site is one of the primary objectives of the Reclamation Plan. Reclamation of the tailings disposal facility and mine process site is not likely to resemble habitat currently occupying those sites; upland Sitka spruce forest --a new habitat at the mine site -- would be established. Also, the Reclamation Plan (August 1997) calls for the creation of 55 acres of open water with wetland fringe habitat in sedimentation ponds and borrow pits. While acknowledging the permanent wetland loss, the Final SEIS notes that the upland and aquatic habitats created would increase habitat diversity at the site. Reclamation will occur in stages throughout the life of the project as disturbed areas no longer in use are regraded, stabilized and revegetated. Final reclamation of the project site will begin at mine closure.
During project operation, Coeur will conduct pilot tests to determine the plant species and composition that will be the most successful for site reclamation. Coeur should evaluate the use of grass-seed mixtures, deciduous and coniferous trees, and shrub species to determine the optimum plant selection to reestablish wildlife habitat and meet other reclamation objectives. Relying solely on natural succession, centuries would be required to reestablish the old growth forest habitat that will be cleared from the project area. Coeur should examine long-term revegetation measures, such as the thinning of second-growth forest that is reestablished in reclaimed areas, to increase habitat diversity and productivity for wildlife (FEIS, page 2-60). Revegetation criteria prior to release of a reclamation bond call for 75 percent live cover of self-sustaining vegetation. Additional strategies may evolve over the life of the mine as results from the test plots become known and would be integrated into the Reclamation Plan.
Wildlife Contact with Camp Facilities, Personnel and Solid Waste
The presence of the mining camp, including the food and solid waste odors that are associated with it, may attract black bears that become habituated to humans. Proper management of domestic solid waste will be essential to ensure that bears are not attracted to the site and are not destroyed in defense of life or property. Coeur proposes to incinerate domestic solid waste in a fenced incinerator area. Storage of solid waste on-site will be limited to non-burnable and recyclable wastes. This will reduce the attraction to wildlife. Using this solid waste management method, the Greens Creek Mine project has been successful in minimizing problems with garbage and bears, in spite of the high brown bear population in that area.
Employee Interactions with Wildlife
Coeur has offered several initiatives to ensure that negative interactions between project employees and wildlife do not occur. These initiatives are listed on page 4 and include employee education, sign posting, and prohibitions on animal feeding, firearms, and hunting.
STAFF FINDINGS
Yes.
2. With respect to wildlife values, will the project be out of harmony with property in the neighboring area? (CBJ 49.15.330(f)(2))
During the life of the mine, the industrial site will be out of harmony with the neighboring area, which provides relatively undisturbed habitat for a variety of wildlife species. However, Coeur will implement mitigation measures to minimize disturbance off-site and will monitor impacts during project operation. The mountain goats, which are thought to be the most sensitive to disturbance, will be monitored, further efforts made to mitigate impacts if the population declines, and steps taken to enhance population size if significant impacts -- defined as a 50 percent or greater decline in goat sightings over several annual surveys -- occur due to mine construction or operation.
Some of the original wildlife habitat at the mine site will be permanently altered to different, yet usable habitat (i.e., the dry tailings facility and process area to upland Sitka spruce habitat; and borrow pits and sedimentation ponds to open water with wetland fringe habitat). Other portions of the mine site will be restored close to pre-existing wildlife habitat in harmony with adjacent property following mine closure and reclamation
3. Will the proposed mine project be in general conformity with the comprehensive plan, thoroughfare plan, and other officially adopted plans as they may apply to wildlife?
(CBJ 49.15.330(f)(3)).
Yes. The project, as proposed and with the conditions recommended below, conforms with wildlife-related policies of the CBJ Comprehensive Plan, which address the protection of a diversity of wildlife habitat (Policy 3.6) and, specifically eagle nests (Policy 3.8). To the extent possible, Coeur will minimize the "footprint" of the mine through efforts such as backfilling underground up to 25 percent of the mine tailings. Reclaiming areas for wildlife use is an objective of mine site reclamation. Further, reclamation of the mine site would yield additional diversity of wildlife habitat through the creation of open water and wetland fringe habitat in the borrow pits/sedimentation ponds and upland habitat at the dry tailings facility and mine process area.
Also, the proposed project conforms with the habitat policies of the Juneau Coastal Management Program, as they relate to wildlife because proposed mitigation measures will, in most cases, address the need to maintain the characteristics of the habitat that support eagles, sea lions, mountain goats, black bears, and other wildlife living in the area. While it is not possible to develop a mine without some impact on habitat, the project as proposed and with the conditions included in the large mine permit meets the intent of the Juneau Coastal Management Program. As indicated in its April 18, 1997 consistency review comments to the Alaska Division of Governmental Coordination, CBJ further believes that: 1) there is a significant public need for the Kensington mine, 2) there is no feasible and prudent alternative to either the applicant's proposal or the U.S. Forest Service's preferred alternative (in the Draft SEIS) that markedly improves conformance with the JCMP habitat standards, and 3) conformance with these habitat standards will be maximized through careful siting, best management practices, and reclamation of the mine project site.
4. Will the proposed project result in development within 330 feet of an eagle nest?
CBJ 49.70.310(a)
No mine construction and operation is anticipated within 330 feet of an eagle nest.
5. Will the mining operation be conducted in such a way as to mitigate adverse ... general welfare impacts -- such as on wildlife? (CBJ 49.65.135 (a)(1)).
The proposed project, with the conditions recommended by staff, will provide an adequate level of protection for wildlife.
With respect to mountain goats, the monitoring approach will enable the company and agencies to assess and mitigate project impacts on the goats. As part of this monitoring, an analysis of a declining goat population or an assessment of the likelihood of success in a transplanting effort would occur in the future if the aerial surveys indicated a problem. These analysis and assessment efforts cannot be performed now as part of the permitting process because they would require then-current field/survey observations, regional goat population/health data, and available reports to identify factors causing the observed population decline or to determine the likelihood of success of a transplanting under then-current conditions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the following conditions be included in the large mine permit:
2. As part of employee orientation, the operator shall provide training in wildlife management and interactions to all project (i.e., company and long-term contract) employees. Training shall include (but need not be limited to): appropriate solid waste management, prohibitions on hunting and trapping at the project site, briefing on black bear encounters and safety measures, effects of noise and disturbance on wildlife, and reporting unusual wildlife sightings or injured animals to the "wildlife contact" (as described in above condition). The operator shall adopt a personnel policy that prohibits the purposeful or negligent feeding of wildlife at the project site, and shall inform personnel of this policy during training. Training shall be provided to all project employees within 10 days of beginning work at the Kensington project site.
3. Unnecessary and avoidable interference and any harassment of mountain goats during mine construction and operation are prohibited. In particular, the operator shall ensure that all helicopter pilots employed on the project receive training in avoiding disturbance to mountain goats and in using appropriate flight paths to minimize disturbance caused by aircraft. Training shall be provided to all new pilots within 10 days of hiring.
4. The operator shall monitor mountain goats in the project area. If two or more consecutive years of aerial surveys conducted by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game indicate a goat population decline of 50 percent or more from a benchmark established during the first two years of project activity, the operator shall contract with ADFG for an analysis of the Lion's Head Mountain subpopulation decline. In conjunction with ADFG and the U.S. Forest Service, the operator shall identify and undertake interim mitigating measures, in accordance with the analysis. If a 50 percent or greater population decline exists at mine closure, the operator shall contract with ADFG for an assessment of replanting mountain goats. A replanting effort shall occur only if ADFG determines that there is a reasonable likelihood of success. The operator shall conduct a one-time transplant of approximately 15-20 goats, with aerial surveys during the following two years to assess the success.
Return
to Kensington Mine Review Page
Return to the
Capital City Home Page
Our URL is http://www.juneau.lib.ak.us/cdd/Kensingt.htm