appendix 6 - iis7spatialim.golder.ca/final_ea/docs/appendix/phase1_final... · 2017-11-02 ·...

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE PHASE 1 NEW TRANSMISSION LINE TO PICKLE LAKE PROJECT SECTION 6.0: BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT BASELINE CHARACTERIZATION AND EFFECTS ASSESSMENT

October 2017 Project No. 1535751

APPENDIX 6.3C 2017 Bat Field Survey Results


October 2017 Project No. 1535751 i

Table of Contents

6.3C1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1

6.3C2.0 METHODS ................................................................................................................................................. 1

6.3C2.1 Acoustic Assessment ............................................................................................................................. 1

6.3C2.2 Hibernacula Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 7

6.3C3.0 RESULTS .................................................................................................................................................. 8

6.3C3.1 Acoustic Assessment ............................................................................................................................. 8

6.3C3.2 Hibernacula Assessment ...................................................................................................................... 13

TABLES

Table 6.3C-1: Bat Detector Deployment Details, 2017 ..................................................................................................... 2 Table 6.3C-2: Total Number of Passes by Species and Bat Detector, 2017 .................................................................... 9 Table 6.3C-3: Bat Passes per Night by Species and Bat Detector, 2017 ....................................................................... 11 FIGURES

Figure 6.3C-1: Bat Detector Locations and Habitat Suitability, 2017 ................................................................................. 5 PHOTOS

Photo 6.3C-1: Potential hibernacula location noted within Project laydown and construction camp areas along the Preliminary Proposed Corridor right-of-way ............................................................................................. 13




October 2017 Project No. 1535751 ii

This page intentionally left blank


October 2017 Project No. 1535751 1

6.3C1.0 INTRODUCTION Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) is supporting Wataynikaneyap Power L.P. (Wataynikaneyap) with the Phase 1 New Transmission Line to Pickle Lake Project (the Project) environmental assessment (EA). Golder and Wataynikaneyap met with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Fisheries (MNRF) on March 9, 2017 to review the bat survey results from 2016 for the Project. During discussions at the meeting, it was suggested by the MNRF that Wataynikaneyap complete an acoustic assessment of bat activity at potential bat maternity habitats previously characterized in 2016 to support the EA. Wataynikaneyap agreed to complete a survey between the submission of the Draft EA Report and Final EA Report. The additional field work is intended to provide confidence in the results of the bat maternity habitat baseline that was previously characterized by aerial surveys in the spring of 2016. Project laydown and construction camp areas along the right-of-way (ROW) were assessed via helicopter for hibernacula potential. This memorandum presents the results of the survey.

6.3C2.0 METHODS 6.3C2.1 Acoustic Assessment This field program was completed to confirm “regular and frequent” occupancy at habitats classified as high or moderate snag density, while low snag density habitats were also surveyed for comparison. No effort was made to assess areas in the “none” category for snag potential (e.g., open areas or areas with few snags). The acoustic study was comprised of:

Installation of one bat detector per candidate maternity roost habitat, with a total of 20 candidate sites divided amongst the high, moderate and low habitat types and the Preliminary Proposed and Alternative corridors local study areas (LSAs) (Table 6.3C-1; Figure 6.3C-1). The LSAs for each corridor include a 500-m buffer around the 2-km-wide corridor and a buffer of 500 m around connection facilities, transformer station, laydown areas, construction camps, and new and existing access roads.

Detector placement focused on habitat edges, corridors or feeding areas adjacent to the habitat. Effort was not distributed equally along the lengths of the Preliminary Proposed and Alternative corridor alignments due to logistical constraints. Effort was focused on areas that included higher densities of moderate and high snag potential, which are limited in extent compared to the other habitat types.

Wildlife Acoustics full-spectrum bat detectors were deployed to collect at least 14 nights of acoustic monitoring from June 29 or 30, 2017 through July 23, 2017.

The acoustic data were analyzed and vetted using Sonobat 4.1 call analysis software, to assign bat call passes to species or group levels where appropriate.



Table 6.3C-1: Bat Detector Deployment Details, 2017

Plot Name Corridor(a)

Location (UTM)(b) Habitat Suitability Habitat Description

Proximity to Water

[m](c) Easting Northing

BM01 Alternatives 580483 5480397 Moderate Semi-mature jack pine-trembling aspen mixedwood forest

300

BM02 Alternatives 630210 5522614 Moderate Mature mixedwood forest and road ROW with snags

200

BM03 Alternatives 633366 5531287 Moderate Semi-mature white birch-spruce-trembling aspen mixedwood forest

200

BM04 Alternatives 638416 5537747 Low Semi-mature coniferous forest adjacent to wetland

0

BM05 Alternatives 641504 5541213 Low Semi-mature jack pine forest adjacent to beaver-flooded wetland

0

BM06 Alternatives 658931 5559345 Low Open black spruce forest 100 BM07 Alternatives 659618 5561428 High Mixedwood spruce-trembling

aspen forest adjacent to road ROW

550

BM08 Alternatives 663293 5575392 Moderate Mixedwood jack pine-white birch forest with snags

500

BM09 Alternatives 669883 5610552 Moderate Mature spruce-trembling aspen mixedwood forest

1,000

BM10 Alternatives 671840 5616953 Low Semi-mature spruce-trembling aspen mixedwood forest

250

BM11 Preliminary Proposed

619288 5662339 High Mature trembling aspen forest

100


622115 5667885 High Mature spruce-trembling aspen mixedwood forest adjunct to wetland

0


632684 5676539 High Mature spruce-trembling aspen mixedwood forest

300


588952 5528793 Low Semi-mature spruce-trembling aspen mixedwood forest

100


583954 5520610 Low Semi-mature coniferous forest

150


569369 5516155 Low Semi-mature spruce-trembling aspen mixedwood forest adjacent to road

400

BM17 Alternatives 620096 5500095 High Mature spruce-trembling aspen mixedwood forest

850



Table 6.3C-1: Bat Detector Deployment Details, 2017

Plot Name Corridor(a)

Location (UTM)(b) Habitat Suitability Habitat Description

Proximity to Water

[m](c) Easting Northing

BM18 Alternatives 615813 5493763 High Mature trembling aspen forest

1,000

BM19 Alternatives 612035 5488834 High Mature spruce-trembling aspen mixedwood forest

300

BM20 Alternatives 609842 5486601 High Powerline ROW with remnant snags

200

a) Alternatives = bat detectors were placed along the section of the Corridor Alterative Through Mishkeegogamang and Corridor Alternative Around Mishkeegogamang alignments that are shared by both corridors (i.e., the section of both Corridor Alternatives that are south of Mishkeegogamang traditional territory). b) UTM = Universal Transverse Mercator in Zone 15U. c) Proximity to Water = approximate distance to open water available for foraging bats. ̶̶– = not applicable; m = metres; ROW = right-of-way;

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.!.

!.

!.

!P

!P

!P

!P!P

!P!P

!P

!P

!P

!P

!P

!P

!P

!P!P

!P

!P!P!P

#*

#*

#*

#*#*

#*

#*

WapesiLake

Bow Lake

CollishawLake

KapikikLake

Springpole Lake

Fry Lake

IndianLake

LostLake

PenassiLake

AmikLake

KukukusLake

BellLake

BasketLake

UpperManitou

Lake

DinorwicLake

AgimakLake

CarillonLake

ShabumeniLake

BerthaLake

SesikinagaLakeConfederation

LakeJeanette

Lake

ZionzLake

BlackstoneLake

Lake St.Joseph

AdamhayLake

MinissLake

CarlingLake

Savant Lake

HeathcoteLake

St.Raphael

Lake

De LessepsLake

TullyLake

MarchingtonLake Kawaweogama

Lake

RaggedWood Lake

UnevenLake

VistaLake

HarmonLake

HilltopLake

BigVermilion

Lake

AbramLake

Big SandyLake

MountairyLake

MetiongaLake

WeaverLake

WawangLake

MooselandLake

Lac Seul

PelicanLake

OchigLake

CoucheemoskogLakeWright

Lake

OsnaburghLake

KasagiminnisLake

Cat Lake

KapkichiLake

PickleLake

TarpLake

MeenLake

ObaskakaLake

BrennanLake

DoranLake

BamajiLake

SelwynLake

BirchLake

WhitemudLake

DobieLake

WapikaimaskiLake

SparklingLake Kashishibog

Lake

FairchildLake

SeseganagaLake

BotsfordLake

SowdenLake

BoyerLake

BertrandLake

RouteLake

GullwingLake

BendingLake

KeecheneekeeSahkaheekahn/Upper

Goose Lake

ArmitLake

VincentLake

RaleighLake

ChurchillLake

BarringtonLake

PaguchiLake

HighstoneLake

PressLake

GullLake

WapageisiLake

MinchinLake

FitchieLake

StormyLake

EastPashkokogan

Lake

McCreaLake

BarrelLake

MinnitakiLake

SturgeonLake

CecilLake

ClearLake

KezikLake

McVicarLake

MattawaLake

HookerLake

ZarnLake

SlateLake

Shikag Lake

WhitefishLake

WinteringLake

LowerManitou

Lake

SandbarLake

HamiltonLake

OtatakanLake

PakashkanLake

FawcettLake

UchiLake

WatcombLake

HWY

599

HWY 17

HWY

516

HWY72

HWY642

VERMILION RIVER ROAD

SLATE FALLS ROAD

HWY

599

ST. RAPHAELLAKE PROVINCIAL PARK

(WATERWAY CLASS)

!

BUTLER LAKEPROVINCIAL

NATURE RESERVE

!

EAST ENGLISH RIVERPROVINCIAL PARK

(WATERWAY CLASS)

!

TURTLE RIVER-WHITE OTTERLAKE PROVINCIAL PARK

(WATERWAY CLASS)

!

WINDIGO POINTPROVINCIAL NATURERESERVE

!MINNITAKI KAMESPROVINCIAL

NATURE RESERVE

!SANDBAR LAKEPROVINCIAL PARK(NATURAL ENVIRONMENTCLASS)

!

PIPESTONE RIVERPROVINCIAL PARK

!

BRIGHTSAND RIVERPROVINCIAL PARK

! OJIBWAYPROVINCIAL PARK

!

LOLA LAKEPROVINCIALNATURERESERVE

!AARONPROVINCIAL

PARK

ALBANY RIVERPROVINCIAL PARK

! BEEKAHNCHEEKAHMEENGDEEBAHNCHEEKAYWEEHNEENAHOHNAHNUHN

! BONHEUR RIVER KAMEPROVINCIALNATURE RESERVE

E1CTRANSMISSION LINE

M1MTRANSMISSION LINE

Cat LakeFirstNation

Lac Seul First Nation

Slate Falls Nation

WabigoonLake Ojibway

Nation

Mishkeegogamang FirstNation

OjibwayNation ofSaugeen

Savant Lake

!

OSNABURGHHOUSE

! NEWOSNABURGH

CASUMMIT LAKE

ENGLISH RIVER

TRAPPER'S LANDING

UCHI LAKE

SIOUXLOOKOUT

IGNACE

DINORWIC

HUDSON

ALLANWATERBRIDGE

SAVANT LAKE

FRENCHMAN'S HEAD

SIXMILE

CORNER

CENTRAL PATRICIAPICKLE CROW

SWAIN POST

SAMLAKE

SLATE FALLS

SOUTHBAY

GRAHAM

BM01

BM02

BM03

BM04BM05

BM06BM07

BM08

BM09

BM10

BM11

BM12

BM13

BM14

BM15BM16

BM17

BM18BM19

BM20

Alcona Mine Shaft

PotHib7

PotHib2

PotHib3

PotHib4

PotHib5

PotHib6

PICKLE LAKE

SUPERIORJUNCTION

CLIENTWATAYNIKANEYAP POWER L.P.

PROJECT

TITLEBAT DETECTOR AND HIBERNACULA SURVEY LOCATIONS, 2017

G:\Projects\2011\11-1151-0456_Dryden_To_PickleLake_TransmissionLine\GIS\MXDs\Working\Terrestrial_Biology\TechMemo\Phase 1 - Bat_Detector_Hibernacula_Survey_Locations_2017.mxd

IF TH

IS ME

ASUR

EMEN

T DOE

S NOT

MAT

CH W

HAT I

S SHO

WN, T

HE SH

EET S

IZE H

AS BE

EN M

ODIFI

ED FR

OM:

25mm

0

1535751 #### ####

2017-10-30JMCJMCLD-

CONSULTANT

PROJECT NO. CONTROL REV. FIGURE

YYYY-MM-DDDESIGNEDPREPAREDREVIEWEDAPPROVED

LEGENDPreliminary Proposed Corridor 40-m-wideTransmission Line Alignment Right-of-way (ROW)Corridor Alternatives Proposed 40-m-wideTransmission Line Alignment ROWPotential New Access

Potential Existing AccessTemporaryLaydown Area(Preliminary Location)TemporaryConstruction Camp(Preliminary Location)Connection Facility(Preliminary Location)Transformer Station(Preliminary Location)

!. City/Town

")

Wataynikaneyap PowerCommunity(First Nation Community)

") First Nation Community

Railway

Road

Highway

Waterbody

Provincial Park

Conservation Reserve

First Nations ReserveUtility Lines

Existing ElectricalTransmission LineNatural Gas Pipeline

Wildlife Local Study Area

#* Hibernacula Survey SiteBat Detector Site Habitat Potential

!P High

!P Moderate

!P Low

PHASE 1 NEW TRANSMISSION LINE TO PICKLE LAKE PROJECT

0 15 30

1:800,000 KILOMETERS

REFERENCE(S)1. BASE DATA - MNR LIO AND NTDB, OBTAINED 20152. CORRIDOR ALTERNATIVES - PROVIDED BY GENIVAR MAR-AUG 20123. PRELIMINARY PROPOSED 40-M-WIDE ALIGNMENT ROW - PRODUCED BYGOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD. OCTOBER 24, 20134. ACCESS DATA - PROVIDED BY POWERTEL. POWTEL ACCESS STUDY2015-06-26.ZIP, CAMPS PREFERRED ROUTE.KMZ, 599 ROUTE ACCESS.KMZ5. CONNECTION FACILITY & TRANSFORMER STATION - PROVIDED BYPOWERTEL. STATIONS PREFERRED ROUTE.KMZ6. FIRST NATION COMMUNITIES FROM INDIGENOUS AND NORTHERN AFFAIRSCANADA (WWW.AINC-INAC.GC.CA)7. PRODUCED BY GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD UNDER LICENCE FROM ONTARIOMINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES, © QUEENS PRINTER 20088. PROJECTION: TRANSVERSE MERCATOR DATUM: NAD 83 COORDINATESYSTEM: UTM ZONE 15

1. THIS FIGURE IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH ACCOMPANYING TEXT.2. ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.3. NOT FOR ENGINEERING PURPOSES.

NOTE(S)

6.3C-1



Data analysis was conducted by Dan Coffen (Biologist, Adv.Dip., Golder) and reviewed by Mitch Firman (Wildlife Biologist, M.Sc., Golder), who have extensive experience analysing bat acoustic signals. Mr. Coffen received formal training in the identification of bat echolocation auditory signatures using Sonobat (instructor Janet Tyburec at Bat Survey Solutions) during the 2017 Acoustic Survey Methods training course. Mr. Firman received formal training in the identification of bat echolocation auditory signatures using both Analook (instructor Chris Corben) and Sonobat (instructor Joe Szewczak) during the 2012 Bat Conservation International Monitoring Workshop. The analysis was completed using Sonobat software and consisted of a tally of all bat passes, where a bat pass is attributed to a bat flying through the detection radius of the bat detector, and assigning the passes to bat species or species group based on characteristics of the echolocation recording (Lausen 2008). Species groups were as follows:

high frequency, which may include various species of the genus Myotis (little brown myotis [M. lucifugus], or northern myotis [M. septentrionalis]) and red bat (Lasiurus borealis);

low frequency, which may include hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), silver-haired bat, and big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus); and

unknown, which includes calls that could clearly be identified as a bat, but could not be identified to species or species group due to recording quality or because the characteristic frequency fell between 30 and 35 kilohertz (kHz).

Because an individual bat may be recorded making multiple passes, the data presented are a measure of bat activity in the vicinity of the bat detectors, not a direct measure of the numbers of bats within or passing through the LSA for each corridor. Data were summarized by night and by detector.

6.3C2.2 Hibernacula Assessment Project laydown and construction camp areas along the ROW were assessed from the helicopter for hibernacula potential using the following criteria for exclusion as a candidate hibernaculum (PGC and USFWS 2012):

There is only one horizontal opening, and it is less than 15 cm in diameter, and no or very little airflow is detected.

The opening is a vertical shaft less than 0.3 m in diameter.

The passage continues less than 15 m and terminates with no fissures that bats can access (this assumes the passage is safe enough to enter and has been thoroughly inspected).

The mine is prone to flooding, collapsed shut and completely sealed, or otherwise inaccessible to bats.

It is a “new” opening, which has occurred recently (less than 1 year old) due to subsidence.

The six potential hibernacula locations that were identified along the Preliminary Proposed Corridor and the Alternative corridor ROWs during the aerial bat habitat assessment in 2016 will be visited during the week of September 11, 2017 to determine their suitability as potential hibernacula using the criteria listed above.



6.3C3.0 RESULTS 6.3C3.1 Acoustic Assessment Bat detectors were distributed amongst low, moderate, and high potential maternity habitats and amongst the Preliminary Proposed Corridor and the Corridor Alternatives (Figure 6.3C-1, Table 6.3C-2). The bat detector at plot BM01 (Figure 6.3C-1) malfunctioned and did not record any data; all other bat detectors recorded data for 24 or 25 nights (Table 6.3C-2).

Over the entire survey period, a total of 2,997 bat passes (4.8 bat passes/night) were recorded (Table 6.3C-2, Table 6.3C-3). Most passes were hoary bats and unspecified low frequency bats (Table 6.3C-2), which represented 29.7% and 29.2% of total bat passes, respectively.



Table 6.3C-2: Total Number of Passes by Species and Bat Detector, 2017

Plot Name Corridor Habitat

Suitability Number of Detector Nights

Bat Passes per Species/Species Group(b) Total Silver-

haired Hoary Low. Freq. Red Little

Brown Northern High Freq. Unknown

BM02 Alternatives Moderate 25 50 21 29 ̶ 1 ̶ 22 9 132 BM03 Alternatives Moderate 25 3 ̶ 5 ̶ ̶ ̶ 2 ̶ 10 BM04 Alternatives Low 25 1 4 2 ̶ 4 ̶ 37 5 53 BM05 Alternatives Low 25 22 57 9 ̶ 1 ̶ 4 7 100 BM06 Alternatives Low 25 9 4 43 ̶ ̶ ̶ 2 ̶ 58 BM07 Alternatives High 25 10 2 23 ̶ 2 ̶ 6 6 49 BM08 Alternatives Moderate 25 2 11 7 ̶ ̶ ̶ 6 37 63 BM09 Alternatives Moderate 24 2 3 10 ̶ ̶ ̶ ̶ 4 19 BM10 Alternatives Low 24 2 12 19 ̶ ̶ ̶ ̶ 32 65 BM11 Preliminary

Proposed High 24 9 1 16 ̶ ̶ ̶ 1 3 30


High 24 6 2 19 ̶ ̶ ̶ 3 6 36


High 24 1 3 19 ̶ ̶ ̶ ̶ ̶ 23


Low 24 11 5 49 ̶ ̶ ̶ 2 23 90


Low 24 150 88 204 1 7 ̶ 77 48 575


Low 24 100 664 359 20 1 1 388 42 1,575

BM17 Alternatives High 24 3 1 15 ̶ ̶ ̶ ̶ ̶ 19 BM18 Alternatives High 24 1 1 4 ̶ ̶ ̶ 1 ̶ 7



Table 6.3C-2: Total Number of Passes by Species and Bat Detector, 2017

Plot Name Corridor Habitat

Suitability Number of Detector Nights

Bat Passes per Species/Species Group(b) Total Silver-

haired Hoary Low. Freq. Red Little

Brown Northern High Freq. Unknown

BM19 Alternatives High 24 10 4 15 ̶ ̶ ̶ 1 ̶ 30 BM20 Alternatives High 24 20 6 33 ̶ ̶ ̶ 4 ̶ 63

Total 463 412 889 880 21 16 1 556 222 2,997 a) Alternatives = bat detectors were placed along the section of the Corridor Alterative Through Mishkeegogamang and Corridor Alternative Around Mishkeegogamang alignments that are shared by both corridors (i.e., the section of both Corridor Alternatives that are south of Mishkeegogamang traditional territory). b) Bat species: hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans), low freq. (includes hoary bat, silver-haired bat, and potentially big brown bat ([Eptesicus fuscus]), red bat (Lasiurus borealis), little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus), high freq. (includes Myotis species and red bat), unknown (definitely a bat species, but not identifiable due to recording quality). ̶ = No bat activity.



Table 6.3C-3: Bat Passes per Night by Species and Bat Detector, 2017

Plot Name Corridor(a) Habitat Suitability

Total Number

of Detector Nights

Bat Passes per Night per Species/Species Group(b)

Total Silver-haired Hoary Low.

Freq. Red Little Brown Northern High

Freq. Unknown

BM02 Alternatives Moderate 25 2.0 0.8 1.2 - <0.1 - 0.9 0.4 4.0 BM03 Alternatives Moderate 25 0.1 - 0.2 - - - 0.1 - 0.3 BM04 Alternatives Low 25 <0.1 0.2 0.1 - 0.2 - 1.5 0.2 0.4 BM05 Alternatives Low 25 0.9 2.3 0.4 - <0.1 - 0.2 0.3 3.6 BM06 Alternatives Low 25 0.4 0.2 1.7 - - - 0.1 - 2.2 BM07 Alternatives High 25 0.4 0.1 0.9 - 0.1 - 0.2 0.2 1.5 BM08 Alternatives Moderate 25 0.1 0.4 0.3 - - - 0.2 1.5 0.8 BM09 Alternatives Moderate 24 0.1 0.1 0.4 - - - - 0.2 0.6 BM10 Alternatives Low 24 0.1 0.5 0.8 - - - - 1.3 1.4 BM11 Preliminary

Proposed High 24 0.4 <0.1 0.7 - - - <0.1 0.1 1.1


High 24 0.3 0.1 0.8 - - - 0.1 0.3 1.1


High 24 <0.1 0.1 0.8 - - - - - 1.0


Low 24 0.5 0.2 2.0 - - - 0.1 1.0 2.7


Low 24 6.3 3.7 8.5 <0.1 0.3 - 3.2 2.0 18.8


Low 24 4.2 27.7 15.0 0.8 <0.1 <0.1 16.2 1.8 47.7

BM17 Alternatives High 24 0.1 <0.1 0.6 0.0 - - - - 0.8



Table 6.3C-3: Bat Passes per Night by Species and Bat Detector, 2017

Plot Name Corridor(a) Habitat Suitability

Total Number

of Detector Nights

Bat Passes per Night per Species/Species Group(b)

Total Silver-haired Hoary Low.

Freq. Red Little Brown Northern High

Freq. Unknown

BM18 Alternatives High 24 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 - - - <0.1 - 0.3 BM19 Alternatives High 24 0.4 0.2 0.6 - - - <0.1 - 1.2 BM20 Alternatives High 24 0.8 0.3 1.4 - - - 0.2 - 2.5

Total 463 0.9 1.9 1.9 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 1.2 0.5 4.8 a) Alternatives = bat detectors were placed along the section of the Corridor Alterative Through Mishkeegogamang and Corridor Alternative Around Mishkeegogamang alignments that are shared by both corridors (i.e., the section of both Corridor Alternatives that are south of Mishkeegogamang traditional territory). b) Bat species: hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus), silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans), low freq. (includes hoary bat, silver-haired bat, and potentially big brown bat [Eptesicus fuscus]), red bat (Lasiurus borealis), little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus), high freq. (includes Myotis species and red bat), unknown (definitely a bat species, but not identifiable due to recording quality). ̶ = No bat activity; <= less than.



The total number of bat passes recorded per detector per night ranged from 0 to 47.7, and averaged 4.8 across all detectors combined (Table 6.3C-3). The highest activity levels were recorded at detector BM16, which is located in the Preliminary Proposed Corridor LSA (Table 6.3C-2, Table 6.3C-3; Figure 6.3C-1). Most of the activity at this detector was by hoary bats. This detector was adjacent to a road, which may be functioning as a travel corridor between foraging and roosting sites.

Little brown myotis, a federal and provincial species at risk, was recorded at six detectors and in the Preliminary Proposed and Corridor Alternatives LSAs, with relatively higher activity at detector BM15, which is in the Preliminary Proposed Corridor LSA (Table 6.3C-2, Table 6.3C-3). Northern myotis is also a federal and provincial species at risk and was recorded at one detector in the Preliminary Proposed Corridor LSA (BM16; Table 6.3C-2, Table 6.3C-3).

6.3C3.2 Hibernacula Assessment There were two potential hibernacula locations noted within laydown and construction camp areas along the Preliminary Proposed Corridor ROW. These sites were determined to have no potential as suitable hibernacula as the noted areas were flat, solid bedrock features (Photo 6.3C-1 to Photo 6.3C-3).

Photo 6.3C-1: Potential hibernacula location noted within Project laydown and construction camp

areas along the Preliminary Proposed Corridor right-of-way



REFERENCES PGC and USFWS (Pennsylvania Game Commission and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2012.

Protocol for assessing bat use of potential hibernacula. Available at: https://www.fws.gov/northeast/pafo/pdf/Cave_and_Mine_survey_protocol_appendix%20A_091012.pdf. Accessed: September 2017.

https://capws.golder.com/sites/wataynikaneyappowernewphase1transmissionlinetopicklelakenorthernontario/ea

report/final/appendices/phase1_finalea_sec06.3_appc_2017batsurveyresults.docx

appendix 6 - iis7spatialim.golder.ca/final_ea/docs/appendix/phase1_final... · 2017-11-02 ·...

Documents