Mountain goat survey in the East Kootenay, British Columbia, August 2005

Transcription

1 Inverted Ridge goat habitat, Wigwam valley Mountain goat survey in the East Kootenay, British Columbia, August 2005 Prepared for: British Columbia Conservation Foundation # A Ave. Surrey, BC V3S 1G3 and BC Ministry of Environment 205 Industrial Road G Cranbrook, BC V1C 7G5 Prepared by: Kim G. Poole 1 and Richard Klafki 2 1, 2305 Annable Road, Nelson BC V1L 6K4 Tele. (250) ; kpoole@aurorawildlife.com 2 P.O. Box 317, Golden, BC V0A 1H0 Tele. (250) ; klafkir@uniserve.com November 2005

2 ii ABSTRACT Mountain goats (Oreamnos americanus) are managed as a big game species in British Columbia, and as such, aerial surveys are conducted periodically to document population trend and productivity, and to establish hunting quotas. To continue to update estimates for the East Kootenay region of southeastern British Columbia, we conducted mountain goat surveys during mid to late August 2005 within all or portions of 7 Wildlife Management Units (WMU). The objectives of these surveys were to determine the numbers and distribution of mountain goats during late summer. We divided the area surveyed into 4 main areas: Flathead (west side of the Flathead valley, WMU 4-01; east side of the Wigwam valley including Inverted Ridge, 4-02), Elk (most of 4-23), White (4-24, eastern edge of 4-21, and 4-25 south of the Palliser River), and St. Mary (4-20). All areas but the St. Mary valley are within the Rocky Mountains, while the St. Mary valley is within the Purcell Mountains of the Columbia Mountains. Standard survey techniques were followed using a Bell 206B helicopter. All goats were classified to kid or non-kid (yearlings and older; hereafter adults). Overall we used 84 hrs of helicopter time, including 60 hrs on survey, and surveyed a 1,867 km 2 census zone of potential goat habitat. Overall survey intensity averaged 1.9 min/km 2. We observed 1,591 goats in 451 groups, and counted 342 kids (21.5% of total goats), a 27 kids:100 adults ratio. Elevations of goat groups ranged from 5,500 to 9,400 feet ( x = 7,770 feet; median = 7,900 feet), and 50% of observed goats occurred in the 7,400 8,100 foot band. Based on past studies and experience, we estimated our sightability was 60% in the Purcell Mountains (St. Mary) and 65% in the Rocky Mountains (Flathead, Elk, and White), resulting in the following population estimates, densities, and kid ratios among areas: Flathead: Estimate of 238 goats; density of 1.26 goats/km 2 ; 38 kids:100 adults; Elk: Estimate of 1,005 goats; density of 1.69 goats/km 2 ; 30 kids:100 adults; White: Estimate of 888 goats; density of 1.66 goats/km 2 ; 24 kids:100 adults; St. Mary: Estimate of 413 goats; density of 0.67 goats/km 2 ; 23 kids:100 adults. Among areas, we observed % more goats than observed during comparable counts conducted between 1998 and 2000 at roughly similar survey effort and coverage. These results, along with survey data from the northern and central Purcell Mountains and the central Rocky Mountains from , indicate a reversal from perceived declines reported in recent years in mountain goat numbers in the region. Based on recent work, we identified the next priority areas for mountain goat surveys within the East Kootenay (WMUs 4-21, 4-25, and 4-34), and suggest that population estimates should be verified with further study at a minimum of 5-year intervals.

3 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT...ii INTRODUCTION...1 STUDY AREA...1 STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY...2 RESULTS...3 DISCUSSION...9 Management recommendations...11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...12 LITERATURE CITED...12

4 1 INTRODUCTION Mountain goats (Oreamnos americanus) are managed as a big game species in British Columbia, and as such, aerial surveys are conducted periodically to document population trend and productivity, and to establish hunting allotments. However, evidence from studies in western Alberta suggests that the accuracy of individual helicopter surveys is poor, results of single surveys should be interpreted with caution, and that aerial surveys of mountain goats appear to be useful primarily as trend indicators (Gonzalez-Voyer et al. 2001). These authors concluded that frequent surveys are required to more accurately monitor populations. Halladay and Demarchi (1996) suggested that sampling for absolute abundance of ungulate populations in British Columbia should be conducted every 3 5 years, while the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program ungulate monitoring plan suggests 6-year intervals between surveys because of the extent of mountain goat distribution within the Kootenay region (Heaven et al. 1998). Although limited by funding, attempts are made to update population estimates within the East Kootenay as often as possible, generally every 5 7 years (e.g., Halko and Hebert 2000, Teske and Forbes 2001, Poole and Mowat 2002, Poole 2004). Surveys conducted since 2002 have estimated greater numbers of goats than previously recorded within portions of both the Purcell and Rocky mountains (Poole and Adams 2002, Poole 2003, Poole 2004), compared with estimates from surveys carried out in the late 1990s and 2000 (Halko and Hebert 2000, Teske and Forbes 2001). To continue to update estimates for the region, we conducted mountain goat surveys during August 2005 within all or portions of 7 Wildlife Management Units (WMU) within the East Kootenay. Most of these areas had last been surveyed between 1998 and 2000 (Halko and Hebert 2000, Teske and Forbes 2001). Our objectives were to determine the number and distribution of mountain goats within these areas. Data obtained will be used to refine current harvest management strategies, habitat quality assessments, and land use designations and management. STUDY AREA Selected survey areas were the west side of the Flathead River valley (WMU 4-01), east side of the Wigwam River valley (4-02; including Inverted Ridge), most of the Elk River valley (4-23), the White River valley (4-24 and the eastern edge of 4-21), the south side of the Palliser River valley (4-25), and most of the St. Mary River valley (4-20). All areas but the St. Mary valley are within the Rocky Mountains, while the St. Mary valley is within the Purcell Mountains of the Columbia Mountains, west of the Rocky Mountain Trench (Fig. 1). Potential goat habitat in the study areas is made up of 2 biogeoclimatic zones: the Engelmann Spruce-Subalpine Fir (ESSF) zone and the Alpine Tundra (AT) zone above tree line. Tree line is generally located between m (6,250 7,050 ft). July and January mean temperatures for the Cranbrook airport are 18.3ºC and 7.5ºC, respectively (Environment Canada climate normals, unpublished data). Cranbrook receives an average of 383 mm of precipitation including 140 cm of snowfall annually. Climate varies within the study areas, with cooler temperatures and deeper snowfalls at higher elevations and on north and east-facing slopes. The Purcell Mountains generally have deeper and wetter snow, and the Rocky Mountains have shallow and drier snow. High on the valley sides, hybrid white-engelmann spruce (Picea glauca x engelmannii), subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa), and lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) dominate, with scattered stands of alpine larch (Larix lyallii) and whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) at the highest elevations (Parish et al. 1996). In the AT zone, conifers are present only in stunted krummholz forms. Glaciers with associated morainal deposits are found in portions of the study areas. We surveyed census zones of potential goat habitat, which generally included steep or cliff habitat above 6,000 6,500 feet (1,850 2,000 m) elevation and below tree line down to about 5,500 feet (1,675 m). (Feet will be provided as the unit of measure because the helicopter s altimeter was in feet).

5 2 Figure 1. Wildlife management units (WMU; green outline, red numbering) within the southern East Kootenay. All or portions of WMUs 4-01, 4-02, 4-23, 4-24, 4-25, 4-21 and 4-20 were surveyed for mountain goats during August STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY Study design and methodology generally followed RISC standards (RISC 2002), and consisted of a total count survey, with sightability correction subjectively applied afterwards. We divided the census zones into blocks (survey units), which usually consisted of discrete mountain blocks that we were able to survey within hours to avoid observer fatigue, maximize helicopter refuelling efficiency, and minimize the risk of animal movement within and out of blocks during the survey period. To take advantage of cooler survey conditions (<10ºC) when goats may be more active and visible, we started surveys at first light (~06:30 07:00 hrs) and generally finished by mid-day (11:30 13:00 hrs). Surveys were discontinued when temperatures were >12ºC. To maximize survey coverage, for portions of 4-20A and 4-20D we used observations from full coverage of discrete mountain blocks surveyed during sightability testing conducted during either early September 2004 (Pyramid Mountain and Mt. Evans

6 3 blocks) or 9 15 August 2005 (Bootleg Mountain and Perry Creek/Mount Flett blocks; K. Poole, unpublished data). We used a Bell 206B Jet Ranger helicopter with pilot, navigator, and 2 observers. All occupants participated in locating mountain goats, and all were experienced at aerial surveys. We surveyed all alpine and open subalpine habitat, as well as areas of broken or disjointed cliffs and avalanche chutes below tree line. Generally starting at the lowest elevation, we flew roughly m ( foot) contour lines at km/hr, m out from the hillsides. We mapped approximate flight lines and survey coverage on 1:50,000 scale topographical maps and calculated the census zone based on the area surveyed. We also recorded broad habitat type, elevation from the helicopter s altimeter (estimated to the nearest 100 feet), and behaviour of goat groups when first spotted. Goat locations and helicopter flight tracks were recorded with a hand-held global positioning system (GPS) unit, which was later downloaded to a computer. We classified goats only into kids and non-kid (yearlings and older; hereafter called adults) based on body size (Smith 1988) to reduce survey time, to minimize harassment (Côté 1996), and because researchers familiar with classification from aircraft agree more detailed age and sex classification is not reliable (Houston et al. 1986, Stevens and Houston 1989, Gonzalez-Voyer et al. 2001, S. Côté, Université de Sherbrooke, personal communication). Incidental wildlife sightings were also recorded, although inconsistent effort was given to age and sex classification of other ungulates. RESULTS The census was conducted over 16 survey days between 13 and 31 August Survey conditions were generally good to excellent with clear skies or high overcast and calm to light winds. Temperatures within the census zone were generally cool at survey time (1 9ºC) but for one third of the blocks were warmer (10 12ºC). We used 84 hrs of helicopter time, including 60 hrs on survey, and surveyed a census zone of 1,867 km 2. Overall survey intensity averaged 1.9 min/km 2 (range among blocks: min/km 2 ; Table 1). We observed 1,591 goats in 451 groups (Figs. 2, 3, 4). Group size ranged from 1 to 42 and averaged 3.5 ± 0.23 ( x ± SE). Typical group size, an animal-centred measure of the group size within which the average animal finds itself (Jarman 1974, Heard 1992), was 10.3 (± 0.27). Nearly two-thirds (64%) of goat groups consisted of 1 2 animals, but only 29 large groups (>10 goats) accounted for nearly one-third of the total animals observed. Overall we counted 342 kids (21.5% of total goats), a 27 kids:100 adults ratio. Elevations of goat groups ranged from 5,500 to 9,400 feet ( x = 7,770 ± 24 feet; median = 7,900 feet), and 50% of observed goats occurred in the 7,400 8,100 foot band. Including all data, mean elevation of goat groups with kid was only slightly lower than groups with no kids (7,680 feet versus 7,780 feet, respectively; t-test, t = 1.82, 450 df, P = 0.07). We observed 49% of goat groups in cliff/broken cliff complexes (n = 451 groups). Other habitats used included alpine meadows or alpine barrens (33%), scree/talus (10%), ridge tops (5%), and krummholtz/timber (3%). Behaviour of goat groups when first observed included standing (35%), running (33%), walking (22%), and bedded (10%; n = 431 groups). For summary and comparison purposes we divided the area surveyed into 4 main study areas centred on WMUs: Flathead (WMUs 4-01, 4-02), Elk (4-23), White (4-24, portions of 4-21, 4-25), and St. Mary (4-20). In a separate exercise for the BC Ministry of Environment, Poole (unpublished data, October 2005) summarized current estimated goat numbers for the East Kootenay by WMU, goat Limited Entry Hunting (LEH) zone, and guide/outfitter territory using the latest survey data for each area. In that exercise, Poole averaged goat numbers within a 1-km buffer on either side of boundaries along heights of land. Here we summarize data by the 4 main study areas to allow broad comparisons among areas, ignoring the buffer zones and areas of overlap.

7 4 Table 1. Mountain goats observed by survey block, East Kootenay, August Block numbers correspond to map numbers in Figs. 2, 3, 4. Adults refers to non-kids (yearlings and older). Date Block no. Name Main WMU Total Adults Kids Time on survey (min) Census area Survey effort (km 2 ) (min/km 2 ) Density (goats/km 2 ) 13-Aug-05 1 Inverted Ridge Aug-05 2 Playsoo-29 Mile Aug-05 3 Overfold Mt Aug-05 4 Shepp Ck Aug-05 5 Grave Ck Aug G Aug-05 7 Aldridge Aug-05 8 Tobermory Aug-05 9 Elk Lakes Aug Quarrie Ck Aug Connor Lake West Aug Abruzzi Aug Bingay South Aug Franklin Peaks Aug Mount Cadorna Aug Fenwick Ck Aug Mount Dorman Aug Flett Peak Aug Rock Canyon Ck Aug Stork Ck Aug Seeta Ck Aug Russell Pk Aug Quinn Aug Van Nostrand Aug St. Mary's Park Aug Pyramid Aug Calamity-W. Fork Aug Hungry-Sawyer Aug Mt Evans - W. Boar Aug Hall Lk - Snowcrest Aug Sawtooth-Alton Total

8 5 Figure 2. Location and number of mountain goats observed in surveyed areas of the Flathead and Wigwam valleys, Wildlife Management units 4-01 and 4-02, August Orange lines and black numbers refer to survey blocks (Table 1). Limited Entry Hunting subzone boundaries are in black and names are in brown. The census zone covered potential goat habitat, generally above 6,000 6,500 feet elevation.

9 6 Figure 3. Location and number of mountain goats observed in surveyed areas of the Elk and White valleys, Wildlife Management units 4-23 and 4-24, August Orange lines and black numbers refer to survey blocks (Table 1). Limited Entry Hunting subzone boundaries are in black and names are in brown. The census zone covered potential goat habitat, generally above 6,000 6,500 feet elevation.

10 7 Figure 4. Location and number of mountain goats observed in surveyed areas of the St. Mary valley, Wildlife Management units 4-20, August Orange lines and black numbers refer to survey blocks (Table 1). Limited Entry Hunting subzone boundaries are in black and names are in brown. The census zone covered potential goat habitat, generally above 6,000 6,500 feet elevation.

11 8 Kid ratios were highest in the Flathead, moderate in the Elk, and lowest in the White and St. Mary (Table 2). Mean density was highest in the Elk and White areas, and lowest in the St. Mary (Table 2). Densities in the St. Mary (Purcell Mountains) were roughly half of those found in the Flathead, and one third of densities in the Elk and White. Highest densities of goats within blocks were found in Shepp Creek in the Flathead, the Quarrie Creek, Connors Lake, and Abruzzi areas of the Elk, and Flett Peak, Quinn Range and Van Nostrand Range of the White River (Table 1). St. Mary s Provincial Park had the highest goat densities in the St. Mary area. Survey effort and goat density were positively correlated among blocks (Spearman rank correlation, P = 0.004, r = 0.50), partially a result of higher handling time required to verify goat numbers and to classify groups in higher density areas. Additional wildlife observed during the survey included 184 mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), 156 elk (Cervus elaphus), 334 bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis), 3 moose (Alces alces), 17 grizzly bears (Ursus arctos), 7 black bears (U. americanus), and 1 coyote (Canis latrans; at 8,100 feet elevation). Most deer were seen in the Flathead, and most elk and sheep were observed in the Elk (Table 3). Ten of the grizzly bears were observed in the White. Age and sex classification for most ungulates was generally not attempted or consistent. Slightly more effort was made at classifying male sheep. Of 40 rams classified, 3 were class I, 22 were class II, 12 were class III, and 3 were class IV. Although our note taking may not have been consistent, we also recorded 52 golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos). Table 2. Number of mountain goats observed in 4 main areas of the East Kootenay, August Adults refers to non-kids (yearlings and older). Area a Total Adults Kids Kids:100 adults % Kids Density (goats/km 2 ) a Area surveyed (km 2 ) Survey effort (min/km 2 ) Flathead Elk White St. Mary Total a Some blocks covered all or portions of 2-3 WMUs, and were assigned to the WMU with the highest area coverage. Table 3. Distribution of other species observed during the August 2005 mountain goat survey of portions of the East Kootenay. Species Age/sex class Flathead Elk White St. Mary Total Mule deer All Elk All Sheep All Grizzly bear Adults Cubs Black bear Adults Cubs Golden eagle

12 9 DISCUSSION In all areas we observed considerably (70 250%) more goats than observed during comparable counts conducted between 1998 and 2000 (Table 4). It is difficult to directly compare results among surveys because survey effort (minutes spent in the census zone of potential goat habitat) was not reported in these earlier inventories. However, time spent on survey within some study areas during 1998 surveys (Davidson 2000) and indications that multiple passes were conducted on cliff faces during 2000 surveys (K. Hebert, personal communication) suggest that roughly similar survey effort and coverage were conducted. Kid:adult ratios averaged 27:100 adults (yearlings and older) overall, but were considerably higher in the Flathead and Elk areas compared with the White and St. Mary. Halko and Hebert (2000) found a similarly high 38:100 kid ratio in WMUs 4-01 and 4-02, and a 37:100 ratio in 4-23, although the later area was poorly surveyed under adverse weather conditions. High kid ratios were also observed in the St. Mary area in 2000 (35:100; Teske and Forbes 2001). Past summer/fall surveys have reported a wide range of ratios from southern interior British Columbia (11 45:100 adults)(mccrory 1979, Hebert and Woods 1984, Teske and Forbes 2001, Poole and Adams 2002, Poole and Mowat 2002, Poole 2003, 2004). Kid production appears to be negatively associated with winter severity during pregnancy (Smith 1977, Adams and Bailey 1982, Swenson 1985) and April May snowfall and snow depth (Thompson 1980, Hopkins et al. 1992). August kid ratios at Caw Ridge, Alberta, averaged 21:100 over the past 10 years (range 15 29:100), during a period when the population increased by approximately 50% (S. Côté, personal communication). Since much kid mortality can occur over winter and goats generally do not reproduce until 2 3 years of age, moderate to high kid ratios can provide an expectation of some recruitment, but are limited in their utility to predict population change (Côté and Festa-Bianchet 2003). Studies point to the large variation in sightability obtained during goat surveys (Hebert and Langin 1982, Smith 1984, Smith and Bovee 1984, Houston et al. 1986, Cichowski et al. 1994, Poole et al. 2000, Gonzalez-Voyer et al. 2001). A number of factors influence sightability (reviewed in Poole and Adams 2002), primary among them survey effort or the amount of time spent on survey within a given census area. The few published reports on sightability for interior mountain goat populations have generally ranged from 67% in the Robson valley using 3.8 minutes/km 2 survey effort (August survey; Poole et al. 2000), 68% near Smithers (effort not reported) (July survey; Cichowski et al. 1994), to an average of 70% over 11 years (range 55 84%) at Caw Ridge using roughly 3.0 minutes/km 2 survey effort (early July surveys; Gonzalez-Voyer et al. 2001). The former 2 studies were conducted with relatively small sample sizes (Robson valley) or questionable techniques (paintball marking from a helicopter; Smithers). The summer goat distribution at Caw Ridge was well known to observers. Sightability in East Kootenay studies conducted using radio-collared mountain goats ranged from 38 85%, and was not positively correlated with survey effort, which ranged from min/km 2 (K. Poole et al. in prep). The results above suggest that survey effort, although important, is not the only factor affecting sightability of goats. More research is needed to clarify the effect of other parameters on sightability during surveys. Gonzalez-Voyer et al. (2001) suggested that an average 70% sightability may apply widely to mountain goat helicopter surveys. However, their conclusion was based on relatively high effort in either small areas or well-known populations, and may not be readily applicable to comparatively naïve surveys of large areas. Standardized surveys have greater utility in being used as indicators of broad population trend over time, rather than absolute estimates of population size (Gonzalez-Voyer et al. 2001). However, management agencies often require estimates of population size based on infrequent surveys, which in the past in the East Kootenay have been calculated based on 40 60% assumed sightability (Teske and Forbes 2001).

13 10 Table 4. Number of goats observed during East Kootenay mountain goat surveys by Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) and Limited Entry Hunting (LEH) subzone, Totals in bold refer to the sum of those zones listed. WMU/LEH subzone reported 3 corrected W total E Shepp A , 02Inverted total A B C D total B C E G total A B C D E B Data reported in Halko and Hebert (2000) with no supporting references. 2 Data from 1998 and 2000 from Davidson (2000) and Teske and Forbes (2001). 3 Data from 2000 reported (Halko and Hebert 2000) and corrected to subzone designation after review of spatial data. 4 Portions of 4-23 LEH zones not flown, or flown in adverse conditions, resulting in incomplete or poor coverage (Halko and Hebert 2000). 5 All LEH zone counts from 2005 (this study) used a 1 km buffer on each side of height of land borders and average goat numbers between adjacent zones. Estimates for portions of 4-20A and 4-20D include goats observed during sightability testing in 2004 and 2005 (K. Poole, unpublished data). We contend that given our survey effort and coverage, we assume that we observed approximately 60% of the goats present in the Purcell Mountains (St. Mary) and 65% of the goats in the Rocky Mountains (Flathead, Elk, and White). We suggest lower sightability in the Purcell Mountains because of lower overall survey effort and the higher treeline and greater association by goats with forested habitats. We suggest that the slightly higher overall survey effort expended in the Flathead (Table 1) was partially offset by the greater amount of tree cover at higher elevation. The same sightability corrections were used for the Purcell Mountains (WMU 4-26; 60%) and Rocky Mountains (4-

14 11 22; 65%) during surveys in August 2004 (Poole 2004). We suggest our sightability may err on the conservative side, but we are obviously unable to verify the accuracy of our estimates. Different sightability corrections could be applied through different interpretation of past sightability studies or the degree of risk managers are willing to take (e.g., by managing for a larger goat population than actually exists). Applying sightability correction factors result in the following population estimates and densities within census zones for the 4 main areas. The St. Mary estimate and density accounts for a net gain of 42 goats observed in 67 km 2 of areas covered by sightability survey flights. Note that these are not estimates of goat numbers for entire or distinct WMUs; those numbers (along with estimates of goats by LEH zone and guide/outfitter territory) have been generated in a separate, more complex exercise that amalgamated all recent survey data for the East Kootenay (K. Poole, unpublished data). Flathead: Estimate of 238 goats; density of 1.26 goats/km 2 ; Elk: Estimate of 1,005 goats; density of 1.69 goats/km 2 ; White: Estimate of 888 goats; density of 1.66 goats/km 2 ; St. Mary: Estimate of 413 goats; density of 0.67 goats/km 2. Therefore, we estimated a total of 2,544 goats within the areas surveyed. The density estimate generated during the August 2004 survey of WMU 4-26 in the Purcell Mountains was 0.62 goats/km 2, very similar to the current estimate for the adjacent St. Mary area. Estimated density from the Bull River (WMU 4-22) from 2004 was 1.83 goats/km 2, only slightly higher than the overall estimates for the Elk and White areas. It is perhaps encouraging that similar goat densities were estimated over broad areas (WMUs) in adjacent areas. These consistencies lend support for an ecological basis for goat densities in the East Kootenay, possibly related to broad habitat carrying capacity or similar density-independent factors in operation (e.g., weather, predation). Management recommendations The results of this survey suggest higher numbers of mountain goats than previously observed and estimated during the late 1990s and These results are consistent with increased numbers of goats observed on all surveys conducted in the East Kootenay since 2002, including portions of the northern (Poole and Adams 2002, Poole 2003) and central Purcell Mountains (Poole 2004), and the central Rocky Mountains (Poole 2004). Given the generally large differences in estimates between 1998/2000 surveys and more recent surveys, we suggest that to provide greater confidence in these recent trends, all areas should be resurveyed at a minimum of 5-year intervals. A review of goat estimates for the East Kootenay suggests that the next priorities for survey should include WMUs 4-25, 4-21, 4-34, and 4-35 (K. Poole, unpublished data). These priorities were based primarily on the need to update surveys conducted >5 7 years ago. The close agreement in goat densities within potential goat habitat (census zone) in adjacent areas (WMU 4-26 and the St. Mary; the Elk, White and Bull) suggests that it may be possible to roughly track trends in goat numbers across large areas between surveys by sub-sampling a smaller area more frequently and extrapolating relative changes elsewhere. One requirement for using this method would be to calibrate relative differences in density among areas. For example, north of Golden in the Rocky Mountains estimated goat densities were considerably lower (0.28 goats/km 2 ; Poole and Mowat 2002) than those observed in the central Rocky Mountains. Another requirement would be to determine the potential census zone within each WMU, which could be completed with a mapping project. We feel that this method should be explored as more current mountain goat estimate data become available.

15 12 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was prepared for the British Columbia Conservation Foundation (BCCF) and funds were provided by B.C. Ministry of Environment under the Recreational Stewardship Inventory Program. Bighorn Helicopters provided the 206B helicopter, with expert piloting conducted by C. Wilson, S. Lappage, and J. Drozduk. The authors conducted survey coordination and navigation, with primary observer assistance provided by I. Teske (B.C. Ministry of Environment) and D. Lewis (Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program). T. Szkorupa, M. Gall, B. Stalker, S. Leunenberger, H. Leunenberger, B. Park, J. Aasland, and B. Warkentin provided additional observer assistance, and we thank all observers for their efforts. D. Gibson (BCCF) and I. Teske provided logistic and administrative support. We thank the Southern Guides and Outfitters within the study area for sharing their knowledge of mountain goat distribution and for participating in the survey. LITERATURE CITED Adams, L.A., and J.A. Bailey Population dynamics of mountain goats in the Sawatch Range, Colorado. Journal of Wildlife Management 44: Cichowski, D.B., D. Haas, and G. Schultze A method used for estimating mountain goat numbers in the Babine Mountains Recreation Area, British Columbia. Biennial Symposium of the Northern Wild Sheep and Goat Council 9: Côté, S.D Mountain goat responses to helicopter disturbance. Wildlife Society Bulletin 24: Côté, S.D., and M. Festa-Bianchet Mountain goat. Pages in Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and conservation. G.A. Feldhamer, B. Thompson, and J. Chapman, editors. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Davidson, A Purcell Range/White River mountain goat inventory. Unpublished report for Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, Athalmer, British Columbia. Gonzalez-Voyer, A., K.G. Smith, and M. Festa-Bianchet Efficiency of aerial surveys of mountain goats. Wildlife Society Bulletin 29: Halko, R., and K. Hebert southern East Kootenay goat aerial survey. Unpublished report for B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Cranbrook, British Columbia. Halladay, D.R., and R.A. Demarchi Wildlife harvest strategy: improving British Columbia s wildlife harvest regulations. Unpublished report. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria. Heard, D.C The effect of wolf predation and snow cover on musk-ox group size. American Naturalist 139: Heaven, P.C., M.T. Tinker, and I. Adams Ungulate monitoring plan, final report, July 15, Unpublished report for Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program, Athalmere, British Columbia. Hebert, D.M., and H.D. Langin Mountain goat inventory and harvest strategies: a reevaluation. Biennial Symposium of the Northern Wild Sheep and Goat Council 3: Hebert, D., and R. Woods A preliminary analysis of intensive, unreplicated survey data for mountain goat populations in British Columbia. Biennial Symposium of the Northern Wild Sheep and Goat Council 4:

16 13 Hopkins, A., J.P. Fitzgerald, A. Chappell, and G. Byrne Population dynamics and behavior of mountain goats using Elliot Ridge, Gore Range, Colorado. Proceedings of the Northern Wild Sheep and Goat Council 8: Houston, D.B., B.B. Moorhead, and R.W. Olson An aerial census of mountain goats in the Olympic Mountain Range, Washington. Northwest Scientist 60: Jarman, P.J The social organization of antelope in relation to their ecology. Behaviour 58: McCrory, W.P An inventory of the mountain goats of Glacier and Mount Revelstoke National Parks, British Columbia. Unpublished report, Parks Canada, Western Region, Glacier National Park, Revelstoke, British Columbia. Parish, R., R. Coupé, and D. Lloyd (Editors) Plants of southern interior British Columbia. Lone Pine Publishing, Vancouver, British Columbia. Poole, K.G Mountain goat monitoring in Canadian Mountain Holidays Bobbie Burns summer operating area, East Kootenay, September Unpublished report for Canadian Mountain Holidays, Cranbrook, British Columbia. Poole, K Mountain goat survey in Management Units 4-22 and 4-26, East Kootenay, British Columbia, August Unpublished report for Water, Land and Air Protection, Cranbrook, British Columbia. Poole, K.G., and I. Adams Mountain goat monitoring in Canadian Mountain Holidays Bugaboo and Bobbie Burns heli-hiking areas, East Kootenay, September Unpublished report for Canadian Mountain Holidays, Cranbrook, British Columbia. Poole, K.G., and G. Mowat Mountain goat survey in management units 4-36 and 4-40, East Kootenay, August September Unpublished report for Golden and District Rod and Gun Club, Golden, British Columbia. Poole, K.G., D.C. Heard, and G.S. Watts Mountain goat inventory in the Robson Valley, British Columbia. Biennial Symposium Northern Wild Sheep and Goat Council 12: RISC (Resources Information Standards Committee) Aerial-based inventory methods for selected ungulates: bison, mountain goat, mountain sheep, moose, elk, deer and caribou. Standards for components of British Columbia s biodiversity No. 32. Version 2.0. Resources Information Standards Committee, B.C. Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management, Victoria, British Columbia. Smith, B.L Influence of snow condition on winter distribution, habitat use, and group size of mountain goats. Pages in W. Samuel and W.G. Macgregor, editors. Proceedings of the First International Mountain Goat Symposium, Kalispell, Montana. B.C. Fish and Wildlife Branch, Victoria, British Columbia. Smith, C.A Evaluation and management implications of long-term trends in coastal mountain goat populations in southeastern Alaska. Biennial Symposium of the Northern Wild Sheep and Goat Council 4: Smith, C.A., and K.T. Bovee A mark-recapture census and density estimate for a coastal mountain goat population. Biennial Symposium of the Northern Wild Sheep and Goat Council 4: Smith, B.L Criteria for determining age and sex of American mountain goats in the field. Journal of Mammalogy 69:

17 14 Stevens, V., and D.B. Houston Reliability of age determination of mountain goats. Wildlife Society Bulletin 17: Swenson, J.E Compensatory reproduction in an introduced mountain goat population in the Absaroka Mountains, Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management 49: Teske, I.E., and B. Forbes Southern East Kootenay mountain goat aerial survey. Unpublished report. Wildlife Branch, British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Cranbrook, British Columbia. Thompson, R.W Population dynamics, habitat utilization, recreational impacts and trapping of introduced Rocky Mountain goats in the Eagles Nest Wilderness Area, Colorado. Proceedings of the Northern Wild Sheep and Goat Council 2: