Western Screech-Owl Inventory and Breeding Status in the Central and West

Kootenay Region

2007 Report

Prepared By:

Doris Hausleitner &

Jakob Dulisse

October 31 2007

Western Screech-Owl Inventory and Breeding Status in the Central and West

Kootenay Region

2007 Report

Prepared For:

Fish & Wildlife Compensation Program Columbia Basin

and FortisBC

Prepared By:

Doris Hausleitner Seepanee Ecological Consulting, Nelson BC

Jakob Dulisse

Jakob Dulisse Consulting, Nelson BC

October 31 2007

Executive Summary

In 2007, call playback surveys were conducted for the endangered Western Screech-owl (Megascops kennicottii macfarlanei) in the central and West Kootenay Region. Thirty-three transects were surveyed between 21 April and 29 July for a total of 17 hours nocturnal survey time.

Western Screech-owls were detected at 9 sites and pair status was confirmed at 4 of these. Recordings of male Western Screech-owl vocalizations were obtained at 5 of 9 territories. Two nest sites were detected. The cavities were both in black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) trees: one was a natural cavity and one had been excavated by a pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus). The nest tree and surrounding stand were described. One of these nests successfully fledged young, as did an additional territory where the nest tree was not located. The discovery of three additional breeding sites in the Kootenay region is significant, as previous breeding activity has been confirmed at only 22 sites across the sub-species range.

Pamphlets outlining species biology and conservation were compiled with the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program and distributed to landowners within active and potential Western Screech-owl territories.

Recommendations for future inventory include a sampling protocol with random selection of survey sites based on habitat modeling and multiple repetitions at stations to estimate species detectability. Landowner outreach should be conducted early in the season to facilitate placement of sample stations on private land. Continued monitoring should be conducted annually at all breeding sites and historically active locations. Additional radio-telemetry research should be considered as an option to expand knowledge of the sub-species biology and habitat requirements. A public outreach program should be developed to educate landowners on cottonwood habitat and conservation and encourage stewardship of Western Screech-owl habitat.

1

Table of Contents Table of Contents................................................................................................................ 2 List of Tables ...................................................................................................................... 3 1.0. Introduction.................................................................................................................. 4

1.1. Species Information ............................................................................................ 4 1.2. Bioaccoustic Recording ...................................................................................... 4 1.3. Goals and Objectives .......................................................................................... 5

2.0. Study Area ................................................................................................................... 5 3.0. Methods........................................................................................................................ 5

3.1. General Methods...................................................................................................... 5 3.2. Transects .................................................................................................................. 6 3.3. Monitoring and Bioaccoustic Recording ................................................................. 6 3.4. Data Collected.......................................................................................................... 6

4.0. Results.......................................................................................................................... 6 4.1 Call Playback Surveys .............................................................................................. 6 4.2 Nocturnal Owl Observations..................................................................................... 9 4.3. Monitoring and Bioaccoustic Analysis.................................................................... 9 4.4. Public Outreach...................................................................................................... 10

5.0. Discussion .................................................................................................................. 11 6.0. Recommendations...................................................................................................... 11 7.0. Acknowledgements.................................................................................................... 13 8.0. Literature Cited .......................................................................................................... 14 9.0. Appendix 1. Figures................................................................................................... 16 10. Appendix 2. Photographs............................................................................................ 18 12. Appendix 3. Western screech-owl information pamphlet. ......................................... 21

2

List of Tables Table 1. Western screech-owl night survey effort including number of transect and

sample stations, listening hours and owl detections in the West Kootenay Region April-July 2007. .......................................................................................................... 7

Table 2. Summary of Western screech-owl detections in the West Kootenay Region April-July 2007. .......................................................................................................... 7

Table 3. Survey repetitions at historic Western screech-owl detection sites in the West Kootenay Region April-July 2007. ............................................................................. 8

Table 4. Observations of all owl species responsive to call playbacks in the West Kootenay Region April-July 2007. ............................................................................. 9

Table 5. Description of nests in the West Kootenay Region compared to the nest sites in the Okanagan and Shuswap Regions. ....................................................................... 10

Table 6. Recommendations and future strategies for the study of Western screech-owls in the West Kootenay Region. ...................................................................................... 13

3

1.0. Introduction

1.1. Species Information

In British Columbia two subspecies of Western Screech-owls are recognized, the interior (Megascops kennicottii macfarlanei) and coastal subspecies (M. k. kennicottii). The distribution center of the interior subspecies of Western Screech-owl in B.C. is in the Okanagan Valley, though they are also found in the Shuswap and the Kootenays (Beaucher and Dulisse 2004, Davis and Weir 2006). They are generally found in low elevation forests, in proximity to water. They nest in cavities , often located in mature black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) (Cannings et al. 1987). Adjacent coniferous habitat and meadows are used in equal proportion for roosting and foraging (Cannings and Davis 2007).

The interior subspecies (M. k. macfarlanei) has been assessed as endangered under the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) and the Species at Risk Act (SARA). Provincially, it has been red-listed and is managed under the Identified Wildlife Management Strategy (IWMS) (MWLAP 2004).

Inventory conducted between 2003 and 2005 identified 11 territories (Dulisse and Beaucher 2006). An additional 12 sightings were reported in the West Kootenay region from 1998 to 2005 by experienced observers (Dulisse and Beaucher 2006).

1.2. Bioaccoustic Recording

Presently, 9 subspecies of Western Screech-owl are recognized in North America (Gehlbach 2003). Sub specific designation of Screech-Owls may be facilitated by analysis of territorial calls, as they separate taxonomically to some degree by voice (Konig et al. 1999). Collecting Screech-owl vocalizations is non-invasive and may give insight into the true meta-structure of the species (Cannings and Angell 2001).

This requires sampling calls from numerous individuals within microgeographic regions and differentiating between individual versus regional variation in call structure (Galeotti and Pavan 1991, Galeotti et al. 1993, Appleby and Redpath 1996). Tripp (2004) and Hausleitner et al. (2007) investigated individual and regional variation in the territorial calls of the two subspecies of Western Screech-owl in British Columbia. Recordings of males were collected from populations on northern and southern Vancouver Island, Bridge and Seton watershed and the Okanagan. Samples collected in 2007 in the West Kootenay region will be added to the reference material and represent a fifth population in British Columbia.

4

1.3. Goals and Objectives

The overall project objective was to inventory for Western Screech-owls during the breeding season in the southern portion of west and central Kootenays. Surveys were conducted along established call playback transect stations, and included some additional high potential sites. Specific objectives of this project were to: (1) conduct Western Screech-owl surveys along established and new survey routes (2) conduct nest searches at all owl detection sites and monitor to determine breeding status and reproductive success (3) assess habitat characteristics in occupied territories and at known nest sites to provide information for habitat stewardship, restoration and potential WHA designation if applicable. (4) initiate contact and provide information to private land owners with identified and potential screech owl habitat. (5) record individual territorial calls to include in provincial bioaccoustic analysis 2.0. Study Area

The area of inventory occurred in the Arrow Boundary and Kootenay Lakes Forest Districts. Sample stations extended from the lower Columbia River Valley and Deer Park on Lower Arrow Lake east to Arrow Creek in the Creston Valley. The northern-most stations were near Slocan while the southern most stations were found along the United States border at Nelway, Porthill and Paterson. New stations were established along Beaver Creek, Arrow Creek, Little Slocan River and Canyon. 3.0. Methods

3.1. General Methods Western Screech-owls were inventoried using the provincial protocols for call-

playback surveys (Hausleitner 2006). The male territorial call was broadcast at stations along roadsides using vehicles, on foot, and by boat during the breeding season (April-July) when owls are most territorial. Daytime reconnaissance was conducted prior to each survey to mark survey points, enhance survey safety and optimize acoustics.

Call playback surveys began at sunset. A survey night consisted of an average of 10 sample stations (range = 6-15; n = 33) placed 250-500 m apart if in linear succession or in suitable habitat patches. At each station surveyors broadcast the territorial call 3-4 times. Each call lasted 1.0-1.5 min and was broadcast using a megaphone attached to a portable CD or MP3 player. When the targeted species were detected, call playbacks ceased and listening time was often extended to determine pair status and owl location. A minimum time of 15 minutes was spent broadcasting and listening at each station. Additional time was added to survey stations to identify unknown sounds or compensate for loud background noises.

5

3.2. Transects

Transects and sample station locations were determined using habitat suitability modeling provided by Ministry of Environment, visual habitat assessment and existing known owl detections within the study area.

3.3. Monitoring and Bioaccoustic Recording

Daytime follow-ups were conducted when surveyors received positive nighttime

responses. This was used to help assess habitat, pair and breeding status. Bioaccoustic signatures were collected at Western Screech-owl sites in the Creston Valley using a digital recorder and directional microphone. Recordings have been sent to Tania Tripp for further analysis.

3.4. Data Collected

Data for owl surveys were collected in accordance with provincial protocols

(Hausleitner 2006) and are compatible with WSI (MSRM 2006). At each sample station, station ID, date, surveyor identification, coordinates (NAD 83 Universal Transverse Mercater Units (UTMs)), time of sunset, and start and end times of broadcast were recorded. Additionally, wind speed using the Beaufort scale, precipitation (none, drizzle, light rain, heavy rain), temperature (ºC) and noise were recorded (Hausleitner 2006).

When an owl was detected at any point in the survey the species, gender, age (adult or juvenile), response time (exact time elapsed between the first broadcasted call and the first detected owl response), type of detection (visual or acoustic), type of call, duration of each call (a call is defined as a series of vocalizations with < 2 minutes of silence between calls), direction of call, and estimated distance to the owl were recorded. Coordinates were projected for all owls. Additionally, any movements and behavioural observations were recorded.

4.0. Results

4.1 Call Playback Surveys

Surveys were conducted on Western Screech-owl transects between 21 April and 29 July. Thirty-three transects including 299 stations were surveyed for a total of approximately 17 hours survey time (Table 1).

6

Table 1. Western screech-owl night survey effort including number of transect and sample stations, listening hours and owl detections in the West Kootenay Region April-July 2007.

Transects Sample Stations Call Playbacks Survey Time (hours) Owl Territories

33 299 338 17.25 9 Western Screech-owls were detected at 9 sites, 78 % (n = 7) of which are new

observations for the region. Mean response time at nocturnal call playback surveys was 6 min (range 1-11 min; n = 16). All but two detections (one on crown land and one on the Creston Valley Wildlife Management Area) occurred on private land (Table 2). Pair status was confirmed (either by duetting individuals or presence of juveniles) at 4 of these sites (Table 2).

Table 2. Summary of Western screech-owl detections in the West Kootenay Region April-July 2007. Location Name

Sample Station Land Status Nest Search Dates Surveyed and owl (s)

detected WSOW Status

Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Pair/nest status

Arrow Creek AC2 Crown 4 July 3 July (male) Single male

Beaver Creek BEAV31 Private 21 May 9 May (male)

21 May (male)

29 May (juv)

Pair, fledged at least 1 juvenile

Beaver Creek BEAV12A Private 25 May 28 May

9 May (pair)

24 May (pair)

Pair, nesting, fledged 3 juveniles

Canyon CAN4 Private 4 July 3 July (male) Single male

Corn Creek CORN9 Private 12 May 26 April (male) 12 May 4 July Single male

Duck Creek DUCK26 Private 21 May 13 May 20 May (male) 4 July Single male

Goat River Private 12 May 21 May

25 April (male) 4 July

Pair, nesting, Nest fate unknown

Kootenay River KR6A CVWMAa 10 July

(male) 11 July Single male

Salmo SAL 26 Private 21 April (pair) 21 May 29 May Pair, status

unknown a Creston Valley Wildlife Management Area

7

Sample stations where owls were detected in 2007 or which were historically occupied were surveyed more than once. Thus, although 299 sample stations were surveyed, 338 call playbacks were performed. Ten sample stations with historic detections were surveyed 2-3 times (Table 3). Of these, Western Screech-owls were detected at the Salmo and Duck Creek sites. The last known occupation of these sites was in 2005 and 1998, respectively (Table 3). Of the 6 territories occupied in 2005, owls were detected at only the Salmo site in 2007 (Table 3).

Table 3. Survey repetitions at historic Western screech-owl detection sites in the West Kootenay Region April-July 2007.

Location Last Active

Last Surveyed

Sample Station Date Positive

Detection Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3

Bear Creek a 2005 2005 COL19 3 May 6 May 16 May NO Champion Creek

a 2005 2005 COL7 7 May 1 June - NO

Duck Creek 1998 2004 DUCK 26 13 May 20 May 4 July YES

Duck Lake nest a 2005 2005 DUCK1 25 April 11 May 4 July NOb

Norn’s Creek a 2005 2005 PC1B, PC2 29 April 14 May - NO

Passmore 2000 2005 SLO2 6 May 28 June 29 July NO

Salmo a 2005 2005 SAL27 21 April 21 May 29 May YES

Summit Creek 2004 2005 SUM2 26 April 12 May 4 July NO

Taghum a 2005 2005 TAG1B 29 April 7 May 1 June NO

Winlaw 2000 2005 SLO8 30 April 6 May 28 June NO a Sites occupied in 2005

b Not detected by surveyors but reported spontaneously calling in April (Beaucher 2007, pers.comm.)

8

4.2 Nocturnal Owl Observations All owl species detected during the inventory were recorded. Of the 61 nocturnal

observations, the Great Horned Owl (Bubu virginianus) was the most common species detected (51%, n = 31) followed by the Western Screech-owl (26 %, n = 16), Northern Saw-whet Owl (Aegolius acadicus) (11%, n = 7) and Barred Owl (Strix varia) (10%, n = 6) (Table 4). There was a single Northern Pygmy Owl (Glaucidium californicum) detection (2%). Table 4. Observations of all owl species responsive to call playbacks in the West Kootenay Region April-July 2007.

31

16

7 61

05

101520253035

Great Horned WesternScreech

Northern Saw-whet

Barred Northern Pygmy

4.3. Monitoring and Bioaccoustic Analysis

Daytime follow-ups were conducted with landowner permission and when

logistically possible. This resulted in the discovery and description of two Western Screech-owl nests, located in Beaver Creek and the Goat River drainages. Both nest trees were smaller in diameter and height than those reported for Shuswap River and the Okanagan (Table 5). The nest cavity at Goat River was natural, south-facing at a height of approximately 8 m (Table 5). The tree was a live black cottonwood (40 cm DBH, 20 m height: Table 5) positioned approximately 75 m from the river. The stand was predominantly black cottonwood, western redcedar (Thuja plicata), trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides) and paper birch (Betula papyrifera). The site had been logged historically and the western redcedar in the stand was secondary growth. The understory was composed of wild sarsparilla (Aralia nudicaulis), common snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), Oregon grape (mahonia aquifolium), Douglas maple (Acer glabrum) and rose (Rosa spp.). Daytime follow-ups successfully located both the incubating female and roosting male. The Goat River female was still roosting in the cavity on 21 May and a follow-up visit at the nest site on 4 July to the Goat River nest failed to detect any young.

The Beaver Creek nest was located in a pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus) cavity at a height of approximately 11 m (Table 5). The nest tree was a black cottonwood snag devoid of bark and containing multiple cavities (40 cm DBH, 28 m

9

height: Table 5) at the toe of a slope approximately 10 m from standing water of a wetland. The wetland was dominated by flooded red alder (Alnus rubra). The nest stand consisted of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), white spruce (Picea glauca), and paper birch. Beaked hazel (Corylus cornuta), thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus), and Oregon grape dominated the understory. A visit to the nest tree on 25 May found 2 fledged juveniles roosting outside of the nest cavity with a third nestling in the cavity and by 28 May all 3 juveniles had fledged.

A second territory on Beaver Creek successfully fledged at least one young. The juvenile responded to call playback surveys on 29 May. An adult male responded to call playbacks on 9 and 21 May. Three daytime visits failed to locate a nest tree at this site.

Recordings were obtained from males at the Corn Creek, Duck Creek, Arrow Creek, Canyon and Goat River sites in the Creston Valley and will be analyzed and included in the existing database. Table 5. Description of nests in the West Kootenay Region compared to the nest sites in the Okanagan and Shuswap Regions.

Location DBH (cm)

Tree height

(m)

Cavity Height

(m)

Aspect (°) Slope(°) Decay

Class

Goat River 40 b 20 8 185 1 2

Beaver Creek 40 b 28 11 83 5 4-5

Shuswap River (n = 5) a 90 33.8 14.8 - - -

Okanagan (n = 4) a 90 30 16 - - - a Data from Cannings and Davis (2007) b Estimated

4.4. Public Outreach

Pamphlets were compiled in cooperation with the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program and distributed to landowners within active and high-potential territories. Landowners were contacted either by phone, mail or in person and meetings were followed-up with the distribution of an information pamphlet. When possible, landowners were invited to participate in daytime nest searches or in nocturnal inventory. A database with landowner contact information and summary of stewardship actions was compiled. Public presentations are to be conducted over winter.

10

5.0. Discussion

The success rate in 2007 may be attributed to several factors as more is learned about the species’ local biology. First, search effort in previous years was conducted primarily in March and April. In 2007, inventory was conducted in April, May and July with the hopes of obtaining more information on reproductive effort. Second, researchers modified sample station placement so that they were close to riparian habitat and adjacent to roost trees, as some research has suggested Western Screech-owls response rates diminish across open fields (Davis and Weir 2006). Third, researchers concentrated their efforts in mixed mature cottonwood forests adjacent to a coniferous component rather than pure, isolated cottonwood stands.

Of some concern is the apparent 83% decline in territories occupied in 2005. The 2007 inventory failed to elicit a positive detection at the Duck Lake Nest site in the Creston Valley even after three repetitions (Table 2) and despite reports of duetting individuals early in the breeding season (Beaucher 2007, pers. comm.). This site is well known in the community, and has likely received multiple visits by birders and other enthusiasts, which may have made the owls unresponsive to call playback surveys. At another well-known site in the Okanagan, it took seven visits to elicit a response from a Western Screech-owl territory (Cannings 2007, pers. comm.). In southeast Arizona, Whiskered Screech-owl (M. trichopos) nests were abandoned or failed due to repetitive call playbacks (Hausleitner 2007, pers.obs.). Additionally, it needs to be considered that a breeding pair of Great Horned Owls was detected at each visit to the site. Western Screech-owls are less responsive to call playbacks when potential predators are within their territories (Davis and Weir 2007).

Provincial protocols recommend > 3 repetitions be conducted to estimate species occupancy (Hausleitner 2006). Thus, when logistically possible we conducted multiple repetitions at historically active sites and at sites found occupied in 2007. We had variable success with detectability. For example, owls at the Corn Creek, Salmo, and Duck Creek sites responded to one of three call playback surveys. The Goat River pair responded to one of two nocturnal call playback surveys. This variable response rate was also noted in 2005 surveys (Dulisse and Beaucher 2006).

The discovery of three additional breeding sites in the Kootenay region is significant; across the sub-species range breeding has been confirmed at only 22 sites (Cannings and Davis 2007). This information will be important for further monitoring and sub-species biology.

6.0. Recommendations

In the case of rare species, such as the Western Screech-owl, estimates of abundance are practically impossible. Estimates of occupancy can act as a surrogate for abundance for territorial species such as the Western Screech-owl when the sites sampled approximate territory sizes (MacKenzie et al. 2006). Proper estimate of occupancy requires attention to two aspects of sampling: spatial variation and species detectability (MacKenzie et al. 2006). The manner in which sites are selected and calculation of detection probabilities is critical to the appropriateness and accuracy of resulting inferences (MacKenzie et al. 2006). We recommend that a sampling plan be created for

11

future monitoring that samples all historically active sites and a sub-set of additional sites based on habitat modeling (Table 6). We recommend multiple repetitions be conducted at all sample stations surveyed (Table 6). No previous Western Screech-owl inventory has addressed the issue of species detectability. Given our experience with variable detection rates, we feel that attention should be paid to this issue.

Most Western Screech-owl surveys conducted in the region have been restricted to surveys accessible by road. We recommend that in conjunction with habitat modeling, transects and sample stations be selected in more remote regions such as Casino Creek, Big Sheep Creek and Edgewood (Table 6). Additionally, many of the sample stations previously surveyed have called across private land at the habitat surveys were targeting. Future inventory should dedicate time prior to survey to liaise with landowners and move sample stations to best available habitat (Table 6). We recommend a public outreach component be executed that specifically targets private landowners.

Given the paucity of reproductive information across the sub-species range and in particular in the Kootenay region, we recommend that future research delegates even greater time to nest searches and reproductive monitoring. Additional territorial calls should be recorded to increase the sample size for bioaccoustic analysis. Another way to expand our knowledge of sub-species biology is to radio-mark individuals. A radio-telemetry study in the Shuswap drainage has shown Western Screech-owls may have larger home range sizes and use upland coniferous forests to a greater extent than previously thought (Davis and Weir 2007). Increasing the sample size and adding another population will be beneficial when drawing inferences about home range and habitat use across the sub-species range. In addition to furthering knowledge of the species, this information will facilitate the Wildlife Habitat Area creation process and possible future monitoring, habitat enhancement, and stewardship work.

12

Table 6. Recommendations and future strategies for the study of Western screech-owls in the West Kootenay Region. Objective Strategies

• Create a long-term sampling protocol for Kootenay region, which includes habitat modeling, random sampling and multiple repetitions.

• Sample remote-access transects

Continued inventory of Western Screech-owl

• Access private land to call into best available habitat

• Increased time spent nest/ daytime searching

Reproductive monitoring

• Radio-telemetry • Bioaccoustic Analysis Increase knowledge of sub-species biology • Radio telemetry

Public outreach • Focus on targeting private landowners with Black Cottonwood habitat

7.0. Acknowledgements

These research activities, public outreach and report were completed with financial support from the Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program and FortisBC. Thank you to Irene Manley and John Krebs for administering the project, helping with fieldwork and handling logistics. We wish to thank Darin Welch and Amy Waterhouse for GIS support, and James Baxter, Angus Glass, and Beth Woodbridge for logistics. We wish to thank Marc-André Beaucher for advice and granting access to the Creston Valley Wildlife Management Area. James Barber provided invaluable local insight into a previously active territory. Thanks to Tania Tripp for providing vocalizations and directional microphone. We wish to acknowledge Tom Dool of the Regional District of Central Kootenay who assisted with land status investigations. Thank you to field technicians Tom Abraham, Maya Abraham, Keinan Chapman, Tola Coopper, Karen Dulisse and Sarah Waterhouse. Thank you to Anna and Alois Hausleitner for generous hospitality and accommodations in Creston.

Special thanks to Annie, Gerald and Sweyn Gartland, Jim Minello and Fiona Winton, Maureen and Douglas Kashuba, Gunda and Wayne Stewart, Skip and Joe Troyan, Dave Duncan and Rick and Arleen Filmore.

.

13

8.0. Literature Cited Appleby, B. M., and S. M. Redpath. 1996. Variation in the male territorial hoot of the

Tawny Owl (Strix aluco) in three English populations. Ibis 139: 152-158. Beaucher, M.A., and J.A. Dulisse. 2004. First confirmed breeding record for the Western

Screech-owl (Megascops kennicottii macfarlanei) in southeastern British Columbia. Northwestern Naturalist 85:128-130.

Cannings, R. J., and T. Angell. 2001. Western Screech-owl (Otus kennicottii). In A.

Poole and F. Gills (eds.), The Birds of North America, No. 597. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Cannings, R.J., and H. Davis. 2007. Status of the Western Screech-Owl macfarlanei

subspecies (Megascops kennicottii macfarlanei) in British Columbia. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Victoria, BC. Wildl. Working rep. No. WR-112 XXpp.

Cannings, R.A., R.J. Cannings and S.G. Cannings. 1987. Birds of the Okanagan Valley,

British Columbia. Royal British Columbia Museum, Victoria, BC. Davis, H., and R. Weir. 2006. Western Screech-owl conservation along the Shuswap

River. Artemis Wildlife Consultants, Armstrong, BC. 14pp. Davis, H., and R. Weir. 2007. Western Screech-owl conservation along the Shuswap

River: 2007 year-end report. Artemis Wildlife Consultants, Armstrong, BC. 25pp. Dulisse, J., and M. Beucher. 2006. 2005 Western Screech-owl (Megascops kennicottii

macfarlanei) Inventory of the Central and West Kootenay Region. Report prepared for Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program & British Columbia Ministry of Environment Nelson, B.C. 25pp.

Galeotti, P., and G. Pavan. 1991. Individual recognition of male Tawny Owls (Strix

aluco) using spectrograms of their territorial calls. Ethology, Ecology, and Evolution 3: 113-126.

Galeotti, P., M. Paladin, and G. Pavan. 1993. Individually distinct hooting in male

Pygmy-Owls Glaucidium passerinum: a multivariate approach. Ornis Scandinavica 24: 15-20.

Gehlbach, F. R. 2003. Body size variation and evolutionary ecology of Eastern and

Western Screech-owls. Southwestern Naturalist 48: 70-80. Hausleitner, D. 2006. Inventory methods for owl surveys: Nocturnal owls that respond to

call playback of recorded calls (Barred, Strix varia, Boreal, Aegolius funereus, Flammulated, Otus flammeolus, Great Horned, Bubo virginianus, Northern Saw-whet, Aegolius acadicus, Northern Spotted, Strix occidentalis caurina, and Western

14

Screech, Megascops kennicottii). Standards for Components of British Columbia’s Biodiversity No.42. V. 1.0. Prepared for the Ecosystems Branch of the Ministry of Environment for the Resources Information Standard Committee.

Hausleitner, D., V. Young, and T. Tripp. 2007. Inventory and habitat enhancement of

Western Screech and Flammulated Owls in the Bridge Coastal Study Area Final Report, BC Hydro Project # 06.W.BRG.01 33 pp.

Konig, C., W. Friedhelm, and J. H. Becking. 1999. A Guide To The Owls Of The World. Yale University Press, New Haven.

MacKenzie, D.I., J.D. Nichols, J.A. Royle, K.H. Pollock, L.L. Bailey, J.E. Hines. 2006.

Occupancy estimation and modeling: Inferring patterns and dynamics of species occurrence. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 324 pp.

Ministry of Sustainable Resources Management (MSRM). 2006. Wildlife Species

Inventory Home. http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/wildlife/wsi/index.htm [Accessed September 13, 2007]

Ministry of Water, Land and Air, 2004. Identified Wildlife Management Strategy

volume 2004. Tripp, T. 2004. Use of Bioacoustics for Population Monitoring in the Western Screech-

owl (Megascops kennicottii). M.Sc. Thesis, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, BC, Canada.

15

H

[

[

!(

[

#*

[

!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!( !(!( !(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!( !(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!( !(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

#(

#

#

##

#

##

#(

##

#

#####(##

#

## #

##

##

#

#Salmo

Trail

Slocan

Nelson

Balfour

Creston

Rossland

Warfield Montrose

Fruitvale

Castlegar

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

FIGURE 1- WESTERN SCREECH-OWL INVENTORY - 2007FISH AND WILDLIFE COMPENSATION PROGRAM - COLUMBIA BASIN

§April - July 2007

Map Projection - BC Albers

!( Survey Station 2007

Owl Locations 2007

# WSOW Locations (2003-2005)

( Reliable Owl Sightings (1998-2005)

0 10 20 305km

16

H

[

[

!([

#*

[

!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!( !(!( !(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!( !( !(!(!( !(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!( !(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(

!( !(

!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!( !(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!(

!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

Salmo

Trail

Slocan

Nelson

Balfour

Creston

Rossland

WarfieldMontrose

Fruitvale

Castlegar

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(

FIGURE 2 - OWL SPECIES INCEDENTAL OBSERVATIONS - WSOW INVENTORY 2007

Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program - Columbia Basin

§April - July 2007

Map Projection: BC Albers

!( Survey Station 2007

Barred Owl (2007)

Great Horned Owl (2007)

Northern Pygmy - Owl (2007)

Northern Saw - whet Owl (2007)

0 10 20 305km 17

10. Appendix 2. Photographs.

1. Arrow Creek (AC2) detection site. 2. Beaver Creek (BEAV31) detection site.

3. Beaver Creek (BEAV12A) initial detection site showing flooded red alder wetland.

4. Beaver Creek (BEAV12A) initial detection site showing dense red alder and shrub habitat.

5. Beaver Creek (BEAV12A). Base of nest tree showing historic beaver damage.

6. Beaver Creek (BEAV12A) nest tree showing multiple cavities.

18

7. Beaver Creek (BEAV12A) fledged young. 8. Canyon (CAN4) detection site.

9. Habitat near Corn Creek (CORN9) detection site. Site is heavily grazed.

10. Habitat near Corn Creek (CORN9) detection site. Site is heavily grazed.

11. Duck Creek (DUCK26) detection site. 12. Goat River nest tree.

19

13. Goat River nest tree. 14. Goat River adult

at nest cavity.

15. Goat River nest site habitat.

20

12. Appendix 3. Western screech-owl information pamphlet.

21

22