The Central Coast Protected Areas Team consists of:
Kaaren Lewis, Chair	Resource Management
Barron Carswell	Ministry of Agriculture, Fish and Food
Ron Diederichs	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Ken Dunsworth	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Tony Hamilton	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Robin Hoffos	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Greg Jones	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Jim van Barneveld	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Mike Murtha	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Kris Kennett	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Mel Turner	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Duncan Williams	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Gary Sutherland	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Jim Pojar	Ministry of Forests
Myles Mana	Ministry of Forests
Charlie Cornfield	Ministry of Forests
Fred Nuzsdorfer	Ministry of Forests
Bruce Whyte	Ministry of Small Business, Tourism and Culture

Special assistance provided to the team by:

Susan Westmacott Denise Stoffels, Doug Herchmer, Dave Flegel, Otto Pflanz, Scott Mitchell, Nancy Colpitts, Stephanie Mooney	Resource Management GIS Unit
and Vicky Bosse	Ministry of Forests
Gail Ross and Shirley Desrosiers	BC Parks, MELP
Sarma Liepins	Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks

Executive Summary

On July 18, 1996, the provincial government announced that a Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) would begin for the Central Coast Plan Area of British Columbia. The Central Coast Plan Area is approximately 4.8 million hectares in size, and extends from Princess Royal Island in the north to southern Johnstone Strait in the south. In a typical LRMP, representative stakeholders, and local governments in the planning area form a ‘planning table’ along with local staff from key provincial and federal agencies. The planning table participants are tasked with negotiating a set of LRMP products which will provide the basis for recommendations on land allocation and resource use for the plan area. As part of the process, the planning participants discuss which areas should be recommended for protection. Approximately 10.74% of the Central Coast Plan Area land base is currently protected.

In preparation for the Central Coast LRMP, the Land Use Coordination Office (RMD) assembled an inter-agency technical team, the Central Coast Protected Areas Team (CCPAT), to review and revise the original study area list. The original study areas were identified through the Parks and Wilderness program in 1990-92. This review and revision of the original set of study areas, is a standard component of the Protected Areas Strategy (PAS), based on the recognition by government that the goals of PAS are broader than those of the Parks and Wilderness program. At the outset of PAS, it was clearly recognized that B.C.’s existing system of protected areas was not evenly distributed across the broad geographic regions of the province and represented some ecosystems and values better than others. A revision of the original study areas (1992) was needed to achieve a more balanced distribution and representation of ecosystems and to include more examples of the extraordinarily high abundance of provincially to internationally significant features and values found in this part of the province.

In March 1997, Cabinet approved a revised set of study areas recommended by the CCPAT. This report introduces the technical process used by the CCPAT and describes the revised set of study areas provided by the CCPAT as a technical resource to assist the Central Coast LRMP planning participants in making their recommendations for new protected areas in the Central Coast Plan Area.

Although some of the revised study areas include a marine component where high marine values were known to occur, this report does not in any way represent the technical assessment required to adequately address the marine protected areas and marine planning component of the LRMP. The required marine technical assessment will be undertaken separately, as part of the LRMP process.

1.0 Purpose of the Report

This report provides the results of a provincial government technical analysis of protected area values in the Central Coast Plan Area of British Columbia. It presents the revised PAS study areas and the gap analysis methods, criteria, and process used to arrive at them by a government inter-agency team (Central Coast Protected Areas Team). The primary purpose of establishing study areas is to ensure that good candidates for protection are not compromised during the forthcoming Central Coast Land and Resource Management Planning process. Although some of the revised study areas include a marine component, this report does not, in any way, represent the technical assessment required to adequately address the marine protected areas and marine planning component of this plan area.

This report is the result of a technical assessment of the conservation, recreation and cultural heritage values and priorities within the Central Coast Plan Area. It is based on a systematic analysis of "gaps" or deficiencies within the current system of protected areas and an assessment of the short-term social and economic implications of placing areas under study area status. This analysis and assessment provides the basis for Cabinet-approved revisions to the study areas previously established in the plan area during the early 1990s.

The map at the end of this report illustrates the existing protected areas and the revised set of Cabinet-approved study areas (March 1997) within the Central Coast Plan Area. The report will be useful to LRMP participants as they begin to address the issue of whether or not these study areas and other areas should be recommended for protected area status.

2.0 Background

2.1 Protected Areas Strategy Goals and Objectives

In July 1993, the Government of British Columbia established the Protected Areas Strategy for British Columbia (B.C. Government, 1993). The provincial government committed to developing and expanding a protected areas system that would protect 12% of the province by the year 2000. Within the 12% target, the Protected Areas Strategy aims to achieve two goals:

Goal 1 (Representativeness)

To protect viable, representative examples of the natural diversity of the province, representative of the major terrestrial, marine and freshwater ecosystems, the characteristic habitats, hydrology and landforms, and the characteristic backcountry recreational and cultural heritage values of each ecosection.

Goal 2 (Special Features)

To protect the special natural, cultural heritage and recreational features of the province, including rare and endangered species and critical habitats, outstanding or unique botanical, zoological, geological, and paleontological features, outstanding or fragile cultural heritage features, and outstanding recreational features such as trails.

The PAS policy clearly states that "some regions of the province may end up with more or less than 12% in protected areas, due to over-riding provincial objectives or existing land use commitments. In some areas, for example, the opportunity still exists to protect large, dynamic ecosystems such as predator-prey systems and large wilderness areas. Long term protection of these ecosystems requires that they be kept intact. Merely setting aside 12% of an ecosystem would not be adequate in such circumstances." Provincial goals and policies for protected areas are discussed at length in the 1993 provincial government document A Protected Areas Strategy for British Columbia.

2.2 Protected Areas Strategy and Land and Resource Management Planning

Recommendations to protect areas are usually made through regional and sub-regional Land and Resource Management Planning processes (e.g., Land and Resource Management Plans or LRMPs). PAS analysis by government represents one of the many types of information provided to the planning process, and is used as background to deliberation over the most suitable zoning and management of the land base based on consideration of a wide range of values, including public, timber, tourism, agriculture, and mineral values, among others.

3.0 Central Coast Plan Area

3.1 General Description

The Central Coast Plan Area is approximately 4.8 million hectares in size (land and freshwater) and extends from the top of the Princess Royal Island in the north to Southern Johnstone Strait in the south. The boundaries of the Plan Area are not ecologically based, but instead largely correspond (by default) to other administrative and/or land use planning boundaries. For instance, the boundary to the east incorporates a large portion of Tweedsmuir Provincial Park and corresponds with the completed Cariboo-Chilcotin land use plan and Lower Mainland IAMC planning boundaries. The western boundary extends offshore into Queen Charlotte Sound. This boundary is subject to change. The southwestern boundary corresponds to the Vancouver Island land use plan boundary. The northern boundary extends beyond the Mid-Coast Forest District to encompass Princess Royal Island and the adjacent mainland to address the Spirit Bear park proposal and related timber issues (see Figure 2). Its landscape is characterized by an intricate shoreline, coastal plains with a mosaic of wetlands, temperate rainforests, and, large, rugged ice capped mountains dissected by rivers, wide floodplains, fjords and estuaries. The climate is generally very wet and mild, although temperatures ar not always so, especially as one moves inland. The Central Coast has approximately 3,500 permanent residents, most of whom are First Nations (1991 Census).

Coastal temperate rainforests in the Coastal Western Hemlock zone at the low and middle elevations of the Central Coast are replaced by subalpine forests of the Mountain Hemlock, Englemann Spruce - Subalpine Fir and the non-forested Alpine Tundra zones at higher elevations. The eastern portions of the plan area also include sub-boreal and Chilcotin Plateau ecosystems. In the southeast, the ecosystems range from Douglas-fir-dominated forests at lower elevations to subalpine forests and then non-forested alpine areas and galciers. In the northeast, they range from pine-dominated forests of the Montane Spruce to spruce-pine forests of the Sub-boreal Spruce to subalpine forests of the Englemann Spruce-Subalpine Fir to non-forested Aline Tundra. The Douglas-fir areas to the south belong to the IDFww (Interior Douglas Fir) which has affinities to the coast and interior. Glaciers are found on the upper mountain slopes, and in some cases almost reach down to sea level. The productive, low-elevation, old-growth temperate rainforests (CWHvm) support numerous fish and wildlife species, such as salmon and grizzly bears, as well as a highly valuable timber industry. Migratory waterfowl and seabirds make extensive use of the coastal wetlands, estuaries, islands, cliffs, and marine waters. This planning area’s coastal landscape and marine environment is unique in Canada and considered to be one of three comparable coastlines in the world. The Inside Passage marine route is world renowned for its spectacular scenery, intriguing history and cultural heritage, sheltered marine travel routes and safe anchorages. Primary recreation and tourism activities in the Central Coast include boating, kayaking, fishing, camping, hunting, wildlife viewing, scenic viewing (e.g., from cruise ships), wilderness hikes and river travel.

3.2 Current Status of Protected Areas and Study Areas

3.2.1 Existing Protected Areas

Currently, 10.74% of the Central Coast Plan Area is protected (excluding marine waters). This percentage includes provincial parks, recreation areas and ecological reserves. Large protected areas in this region include Hakai and Fiordland Recreation Areas¹ and a major portion of Tweedsmuir Provincial Park. Smaller protected areas include such areas as Codville Lagoon Provincial Park, Broughton Archipelago Marine Park, and the Duke of Edinburgh Ecological Reserve.

Of the total existing protected area (excluding marine waters) within the Central Coast Plan Area, 73% occurs in Tweedsmuir Provincial Park and the vast majority (99.34%) occurs in the northern half of the plan area. A large portion of Tweedsmuir is included in the LRMP boundary in order that the Central Coast boundary be contiguous with the boundaries of completed strategic land use plans (e.g. Cariboo-Chilcotin). Tweedsmuir encompasses largely dry, interior ecosystems and therefore is not representative of coastal ecosystems. This leaves significant gaps in representation in the plan area’s protected areas relative to the goals of PAS, especially in regard to the representation of productive coastal temperate rainforest ecosystems.

The following table lists the existing protected areas within the Central Coast Plan Area. A map is provided at the end of this report tofurther illustrate the size and location of these areas.

Table 1: Existing Protected Areas within the Central Coast Plan Area.

Name	Status	Size (land and freshwater**) portion within the Central Coast Plan Area
Tweedsmuir	Class A Park	379,514 ha
Fiordland*	Recreation Area*	76,512 ha
Hakai*	Recreation Area*	51,770 ha
Broughton Archipelago	Class A Park	1,976 ha
Kingcome River	Ecological Reserve No. 40	148 ha
Atlatzi River	Ecological Reserve No. 40	261 ha
Duke of Edinburgh	Ecological Reserve No. 120	2 ha
Penrose Island Marine	Class A Park	853 ha
Codville Lagoon Marine	Class A Park	484 ha
Byers/Conroy/ Harvey/ Sinnett Islands	Ecological Reserve No. 103	134 ha
Thurston Bay Marine	Class A Park	419 ha
Jackson Narrows Marine	Class A Park	32 ha
Cormorant Channel	Class A Park	216 ha
Green Inlet Marine	Class A Park	9 ha
Kitlope	ELU	380 ha
Sir Alexander Mackenzie	Class A Park	4 ha
Oliver Cove Marine	Class A Park	25 ha
Moore/ McKenny/ Whitmore Islands	Ecological Reserve No. 23	147 ha
Total Existing Protected Area	10.74% of the Central Coast Plan Area	512,886 ha

* Hakai and Fiordland Recreation Areas have outstanding First Nation’s issues to be addressed during the LRMP process.

** Freshwater includes lakes, not rivers. Marine waters are excluded.

3.2.2 Original Study Areas (1992)

The two-year public process, "Parks and Wilderness for the 90s" resulted in the original study areas (OSAs) found within the Central Coast Planning Area. In May 1992, government announced this initial list of approved study areas and placed them under Interim Management Guidelines (IMGs). These areas constituted 22% of the Plan Area (see Table 2). With the emergence of the PAS program, government recognized that the goals of the PAS were broader than those of Parks and Wilderness for the 90s program (see Figure 3 for location of the OSAs (1992)).

As a result, the PAS policy directed the RPATs to review and recommend revisions to these OSAs as part of the gap analysis process. The OSAs in the Central Coast Plan Area were made up of predominantly alpine and sub-alpine ecosystems and contained relatively little area with the ecological/conservation, heritage and recreation features and values needed to contribute to meeting PAS goals and objectives for the region. In particular, values such as coastal old-growth forests had not been fully considered.

Table 2: Original Study Areas (1992) within the Central Coast Plan Area.

Name	Original Size (1992)* (portion within Central Coast Planning Region)	Present Status (1997)
Ahnuhati River	19,537 ha	remains Study Area
Ape Lake/ Monarch Glacier	276,028 ha	deleted
Bella Coola/Bella Bella Marine Sites	1,019 ha	revised
Blunden Harbour	443 ha	deleted
Broughton/Cormorant Channel	4,384 ha	portion protected/ portion remains Study Area
Cascade Inlet	138,888 ha	deleted
Coast Mountain/Alplands**	2,899 ha	deleted
Coast Mountain/Mt. Waddington**	4,932 ha	deleted
Kalone Peak/ Dean River	127,739 ha	deleted
Koeye	17,902 ha	remains Study Area
Mt. Waddington/Klinaklini River	397,930 ha	deleted
Thorsen Creek Petroglyphs	9 ha	remains Study Area
Tweedsmuir Additions	4,574 ha	deleted
Penrose Island Marine	853	protected
Smith Sound/ Rivers Inlet Sites	1,231 ha	revised
Sunderland Channel Sites	972 ha	revised
Total Original Study Area	1,037,572 ha	21.73% of the Central Coast Plan Area

* Size include land and freshwater only.

** The majority of these OSAs occur in the Cariboo-Chilcotin region and were deleted as a result of the Cariboo-Chilcotin land use plan decision.

3.2.3 Revised Study Areas (1997)

The revised study area list (1997) reduces the amount of official study area from 22% to approximately 7% to bring the percentage of land and freshwater in the Central Coast Plan Area in existing protected area and study area status within the 18% provincial guideline, as required by provincial government policy. As a result, approximately 15% of the Central Coast Plan Area will be released from existing interim management guidelines. The revised study areas (1997) exhibit a more complete representation of ecological/conservation, recreation, and cultural heritage features and values than the OSAs (1992), despite the reduction in the overall percentage. (See Section 5.3 and Appendix IV for ecosection and biogeoclimatic unit representation in existing protected areas, and original study areas).

3.3 Particular Protected Areas Values in the Central Coast

The Central Coast Plan Area contains several largely undisturbed, coastal old-growth wilderness areas which are increasingly rare. In addition to high economic potential (through resource extraction and tourism), these areas have significant environmental and social values. Undeveloped watersheds, old-growth coastal temperate rainforest, grizzly/salmon ecosystems and recreation/tourism opportunities are considered some of the key protected area values for the Central Coast. Overall biodiversity was another key conservation value considered by the CCPAT, and has been considered as part of the assessment of all candidates within the plan area. For example, complete watersheds also protect and represent other aspects of forest ecosystem biodiversity, (i.e. a full range of plant, wildlife and invertebrate species) in addition to grizzly and salmon habitat. Additional internationally significant conservation features and values include fiords, coastal muskeg, seabird, eagle, and falcon systems, and intertidal habitats. See Section 4.3.1 for a more complete listing of provincially-internationally significant features.

3.3.1 Undeveloped Watersheds

The Central Coast Protected Areas Team regarded the identification of undeveloped watersheds a key consideration in the selection of study areas for the Central Coast. As

Figure 3: Map of the Original Study Areas (1992) of 1991, there were 508 undeveloped watersheds >5,000 ha in British Columbia. Forty-seven of B.C.’s undeveloped watersheds were totally protected, and 33 were partially protected.

Within the Central Coast Plan Area, as of 1991, there was one undeveloped watershed >100,000 ha and 52 undeveloped watersheds >5,000 ha (Moore, 1991). As of October 1996, the Iltasyuko River (part of Tweedsmuir Park) remains the only undeveloped watershed >100,000 ha and there are now 45 undeveloped watersheds >5,000 ha within the Central Coast Plan Area (Source: CCPAT analysis).

Socially, undeveloped watersheds are gaining increased public attention as their numbers diminish. Many people have advocated that intact watersheds are important for their wilderness values, and that they often make logical management units. There is also evidence supporting the importance of watersheds in ecosystem processes (Ministry of Forests, 1992). Watersheds are believed to be often the best and most representative ecosystem unit for capturing vegetation, wildlife and fisheries values. The Alpine Tundra (AT), Mountain Hemlock (MH) and Coastal Western Hemlock (CWH) biogeoclimatic zones have the greatest number of undeveloped watersheds (these biogeoclimatic zones predominate the Central Coast). See Figure 4 for a map of undeveloped watersheds remaining in the Central Coast Plan Area.

According to Moore (1991), there are two types of undeveloped watersheds, as follows:

(Note: Both are considered to be substantially intact and undeveloped.)

1.) pristine watershed - "a watershed in which there is virtually no evidence of past human or industrial activities. Any past small scale removal of trees - including selective logging of individual trees, small patch cutting or land clearing - is limited to less than 5 ha."

2.) modified watershed - "a watershed that has been slightly affected by a limited amount of industrial activity, such as past or recent logging with or without roads, powerlines, pipelines, mining, or settlements. The amount of the watershed affected is less than two percent of its area; or, in the case of watersheds greater than 10, 000 ha, is less than 250 ha."

Tables 3 and 4 list the remaining pristine and modified watersheds found in the Central Coast Plan Area, respectively, at the time of the CCPAT’s analysis.

Table 3: Pristine Watersheds in the Central Coast.

Pristine Watersheds

Allard Lake
Archie Lake
Carter Lake
Chic Chic Lake
Ellerslie Lake
Four Lakes
Green Lagoon

Hotsprings
Ingram-Mooto
Kainet Creek*
Kleklane
Kwakwa Creek
Lockhart Gordon
North Klinaklini River*

Nusash Creek
Poison Cove Creek*
Remote Creek
Sandell River
Skowquiltz
Swallop

* undeveloped watersheds currently protected or partially protected.

Table 4: Modified Watersheds in the Central Coast.

Modified Watersheds

Aaltanhash
Ahnuhati River
Ahta
Atway Kellesse River
Butedale Lake
Canoona Lake
Dallery Creek
Doos Creek
Iltasyuko River*

Johnston Creek
Jump Across Creek
Khutze River
Koeye
Kwalate
Lard Creek*
Mussel River*
Nascall River

Smokehouse Creek
Sutslem Creek
Swanson Bay
Takia River*
Takush River
Tenas Lake*
Turner Lake*
Waump Creek

* undeveloped watersheds currently protected or partially protected.

Of the remaining pristine watersheds within the Central Coast Plan Area, Hotsprings and Ellerslie Lake are included within the CCPAT Study Area revisions. Smokehouse, Canoona, Koeye, Khutze, Kwalate, Ahta, and Ahnuhati are modified watersheds included within the list of revised study areas (1997).

Almost all remaining undeveloped watersheds are located in the northern half of the planning area (See Figure 4). This is largely due to the fact that the northern portion is more remote and rugged than the southern portion.

3.3.2 Grizzly Bears

Grizzly bears, which were once the most widely distributed bears in the world, are now extinct in much of their former habitat. The number of grizzlies globally, nationally, and provincially have plummeted due to increasing human populations, habitat loss, and human interaction. In 1990, the Committee on the Status of Wildlife in Canada revealed that grizzlies are extinct in 24% of their former habitat in Canada, and that B.C. is home to half of all remaining grizzlies in Canada.

The province announced the Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy (GBCS) in June 1995. The goals and objectives of the GBCS address the following three major issues: loss and alienation of grizzly habitat: interactions with humans; and, international considerations. The strategy calls for identification and establishment of Grizzly Bear Conservation

Figure 4: Map of Remaining Undeveloped Watersheds in the Central Coast Plan Area.

Areas (GBCAs) to encompass core habitats and linkages that are crucial to maintaining local populations. While GBCAs may overlap with existing or new protected areas, they may also occur in the non-protected portions of the land base. As such, resource development will continue in these areas, however, careful planning will be done to minimize the impact on grizzly bears. Potential candidates for GBCA designation are identified and prioritized according to the following criteria: habitat suitability; proximity to existing or proposed Protected Areas; and, threat to the grizzly populations. Decisions to establish GBCAs will be made through strategic Land and Resource Management Planning processes, except regarding grizzly bear hunting seasons. Decisions regarding hunting rest with the Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks, in consultation with stakeholders.

The Central Coast’s coastal temperate old-growth rainforests are home to many of the province’s estimated 10,000-13,000 grizzlies. Several existing protected areas within the Central Coast Plan Area, such as Tweedsmuir Provincial Park and Fiordland Recreation Area, already serve as secured grizzly habitat. Since grizzlies have an extensive range, very large areas of wilderness help to support a sustainable grizzly population by providing habitat security and reducing mortality risk. Population densities for grizzlies vary from around 5-65 bears per 1000 km², with a high degree of variance and differences between numbers of males and females. Adult males cover from 350 km² to over 2500 km², while females home ranges can be as small as 25 km² seasonal productive habitats. Many of the Central Coast’s remaining undeveloped watersheds contain highly productive grizzly habitat. Conservation efforts, to be successful, must minimize human displacement of bears, minimize mortality risk and provide genetic linkages across subregions². Providing for the largest carnivore, such as the grizzly bear, helps to ensure that sufficient habitat is available for other species in that ecosystem. The CCPAT examined the suitability of several candidates for protection from the perspective of having key areas managed as core GBCAs. However, linkage across subregions and effective access and habitat managment in the ‘matrix’ outside of the GBCAs is just as essential for population maintenance.

The Ahnuhati Complex, Koeye, Khutze, and Smokehouse Study Areas are rated as the highest priority areas for grizzly bear protection in the Central Coast.

3.3.3 Salmon

British Columbia provides habitat for six species of Pacific salmon - sockeye, pink, chum, coho, chinook, and steelhead trout. In British Columbia, commercial fisheries catch an average of 36 million salmon a year, with a wholesale value of close to $500 million. The commercial fishing industry remains the largest single source of employment for First Nations people in B.C. (Fisheries Branch, B.C. Environment, September 1995).

During their life cycle, salmon reside in streams, lakes, river estuaries and the Pacific Ocean. Salmon require very specific environmental conditions during the freshwater portion of their life cycle. These include clean water, fine and clean gravel, adequate levels of oxygen, a narrow range of water temperature and unobstructed rivers and streams. Salmon populations are exceedingly difficult to report. The 1995 State of the Environment Report for British Columbia reported that 49% of B.C. salmon stocks were stable, 27% were increasing and 24% were in decline (MELP, 1993).

The Central Coast encompasses very important spawning and rearing habitat for salmon in the province. Information from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans database indicates that the total escapement for salmon in the Central Coast planning region from 1984-1994, was close to 52 million while the average annual escapement is approximately 5 million (escapement being the number of fish that are allowed to return to their spawning grounds without being caught) (Booth, July 1996).

Among the revised study areas, the Ahnuhati Complex, Koeye, Khutze, Spirit Bear, Ashlum, Upper Kimsquit, Smokehouse and Dean Corridor contain very high salmon conservation values.

3.3.4 Old-Growth Coastal Temperate Rainforest

British Columbia contains 25% of the world’s remaining coastal temperate rainforest. Approximately 47% (6.7 million ha) of coastal British Columbia is covered with old forest: 53% (5.4 million ha) of the Coastal Western Hemlock biogeoclimatic zone, and 34% (1.3 million ha) of the Mountain Hemlock zone (MacKinnon and Eng, 1995).

Old-growth forests mark the final stage of forest development. The productive, low-elevation, old-growth temperate rainforests of the Central Coast (i.e., the area of CWHvm1 and 2) are among the earth’s most massive ecosystems. Old-growth temperate forests represent a tremendous accumulation of biomass resulting from: the longevity of individual trees (up to 1000 years of age); their inherent ability to grow large; and, gradual decomposition rates. The substantial aggregation of dead, woody material in old-growth forests fosters the development of complex communities of organisms whose existence depends upon this decomposing material. Many characteristics of old-growth forests, such as large diameter logs and snags, are rarely present in younger forests, particularly those that have been managed for timber production. Old-growth forests are further characterized by a great variety in the size and ages of the trees and patchy, open canopies which enable the understory beneath these gaps to be especially well developed (Pojar & Mackinnon, 1994). Old-growth forests provide habitat for several old-growth dependent species in British Columbia. Fenger and Harcombe (1990) maintain that 8 known species of reptiles and amphibians, 41 bird species, and 31 mammal species appear to require old-growth habitat in British Columbia.

Within the Central Coast Plan Area, study areas with very high old-growth coastal temperate rainforest conservation values include Ahnuhati Complex, Koeye, Smokehouse, Spirit Bear and Khutze.

3.3.5 Recreation & Tourism Opportunities

Tourism is Canada’s fastest growing economic sector. It is the second largest industry in British Columbia and generated over $7.7 billion in revenues in 1996. Over 219,000 British Columbians work in businesses serving tourists and community residents. One in eight jobs in B.C. is tourism-related (Tourism B.C., 1996). Nature and adventure tourism are the fastest growing forms of tourism in the world, with over $25 (US) billion dollars being spent on these ventures, globally, each year (Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Planning and Assessment, 1989). Wilderness adventure travel is the tourist sector with the greatest potential for sustainable regional development on the Central Coast, as long as that resource base is sustained.

Some members of the tourism industry consider protected and special management areas as essential for creating a foundation of certainty for investment and growth of this industry. The key to the growth of tourism and recreation is the protection of the resources upon which they depend. Scenery, primarily mountain vistas and coastlines, has been shown by countless studies to be the primary attraction for tourists to British Columbia. The Central Coast has a rich abundance of the landscapes and wildlife that are extremely valuable to the tourism industry. Recreation and tourism interests want to ensure that secure anchorages, on-shore recreation opportunities near anchorages, high-quality visual experiences, and saltwater fishing opportunities continue for the Central Coast. Important cultural heritage and archaeological sites, as well as recreation and conservation sites, are found throughout the Central Coast (Whitbread, 1996).

The Broughton Extension and Cape Caution Study Areas are considered two of the CCPAT’s top recreation/tourism priority areas for the Central Coast Plan Area. Both also have significant conservation values. The Broughton group of islands has seen enormous growth in recreation/tourism use in recent years, and that trend is expected to continue. Several of the new small study areas have high recreation values based on the biophysical features they encompass and safe anchorage and onshore recreation opportunities they often provide, especially along the Inside Passage. Among these new study areas are Boat Bay, Cullen Harbour, Burdwood Group, Fougner Bay, Forward Harbour, Oliver Cove, Rescue Bay, Takush Harbour, Goat Cove, Grant Anchorage, Thurston Bay Extension, and Troup Passage.

4. Identifying and Evaluating Study Areas

A standard component of the Protected Areas Strategy is to review and revise the original set of study areas based on a recognition by government that the goals of PAS were broader than those of the Parks and Wilderness for the 90’s. As stated earlier, the original study areas in the Central Coast were predominantly alpine and sub-alpine (see Section 3.2.2). They contained relatively little area with the ecological/conservation, heritage and recreation features and values needed to meet the full range of PAS objectives in the region. The following technical process was used by the Central Coast Protected Areas Team to identify new areas which better fulfilled the goals of PAS.

4.1 The Technical Process

4.1.1 Overview

The Regional Protected Areas Teams (RPATs) are inter-agency teams of technical experts that are responsible for conducting gap analysis for the PAS (see Section 4.2). The Central Coast Protected Areas Team (CCPAT) contained members from the Resource Management (RMD) and the Ministries of Forests; Agriculture, Fisheries and Food; Small Business, Tourism and Culture; and Environment Lands and Parks. The CCPAT was responsible for identifying and evaluating areas of interest, in order to make recommendations on a revised list of study areas for the Central Coast Plan Area within an 18% limit of land in existing protected area and study area status.

There are five key steps involved in the technical process of identifying and evaluating areas for their suitability as study areas. Steps 1 to 3 are often referred to as "gap analysis" and were used to describe the representative and special features found in each ecosection of the Central Coast and to identify and evaluate areas to fill gaps in the existing system of protected areas.

Step 1: Describe Ecosections

Describe representative areas and special features characteristic of each ecosection.
Identify ecosystem issues and values.

Step 2: Identify Gaps and Areas of Interest to Fill Them

Identify gaps by comparing features and values captured in existing protected areas with those of the ecosection as a whole.
Use PAS criteria to identify and map areas of interest to fill gaps in representation (Goal 1) and/or special features (Goal 2).

Step 3: Evaluate Area of Interest

Use PAS criteria to evaluate and rate areas as to their significance for the protected areas system (e.g., high, medium, low).

Step 4: Identify Short Term Social and Economic Implications of each Proposed Area

Agencies assess short-term impacts of placing proposals under interim management guidelines on economic activity and employment.

Step 5: Recommend Revised Study Areas

Regional Protected Area Teams recommend a set of revised study areas for Cabinet approval.

4.2 Gap Analysis Procedures

Gap analysis is a systematic approach to identifying key gaps in existing protected areas representation and to identify and evaluate proposed Areas of Interest to determine which ones best fill those gaps. Standard procedures for gap analysis are documented in the Gap Analysis Workbook for Regional Protected Areas Teams (June 1993).

There are three components to the gap analysis: conservation, recreation and cultural heritage. Working groups of the CCPAT were formed to carry out the gap analysis for the conservation and recreation streams. Due to limited resources, the cultural heritage stream was not addressed separately. Instead, known high value heritage features were identified and incorporated where possible. Once the analysis had been completed for each stream the CCPAT combined them into an overall assessment (see Section 4.3 for more details). The following sections document the methods and criteria by stream.

4.2.1 Conservation Gap Analysis

4.2.1.1 Representation Framework

The PAS establishes the concept of ecosystem representation as the fundamental premise guiding the identification and evaluation of new protected areas. A mapped ecological framework has been adopted for the purpose of quantitatively evaluating how well existing protected areas capture the range of ecosystem types province-wide. This same framework was used in determining ecological gaps within the Central Coast. It combines two separate ecological classification systems to subdivide the province; the Ecoregion Classification System (Demarchi et al., 1990) and the Biogeoclimatic Ecosystem Classification (Meidinger and Pojar, 1991). The ecoregion classification system, based primarily on landforms and climate, is used to stratify the province into broad geographic units nested in a hierarchy of 10 ecoprovinces, 43 ecoregions and 110 ecosections. The biogeoclimatic classification divides the landscape into ecological map units based primarily on climate, soil and vegetation. British Columbia has 14 zones, usually characterized by 1 or more dominant tree species. Zones are further subdivided into subzones and variants. This classification applies only to the terrestrial components of the planning region. An equivalent Marine Ecosystem Classification system is currently under development.

The Central Coast Plan Area is located primarily within the Coast and Mountain Ecoprovince, but does capture a small portion of the Central Interior Ecoprovince. The Coast and Mountain Ecoprovince holds the second highest number of birds in British Columbia, supporting 79% of all species known to occur in the province (Demarchi, 1991). The coastal wetlands, nearshore and offshore habitats, islands, islets and cliffs are extensively used by waterfowl. Bald eagles, peregrine falcons, black and grizzly bears, mountain goats, otters, salmon, sea lions, and killer whales are but a few of the species that inhabit the Central Coast. The Coast and Mountain Ecoprovince is divided into eleven Ecoregions containing a total of 21 Ecosections. The Central Coast contains 2 of these Ecoregions (the Coastal Gap and the Pacific Ranges) and 10 Ecosections occur within the Central Coast Plan Area boundary. The Hecate Lowland (HEL), the Kitimat Ranges (KIR), the Northern Pacific Ranges (NPR), the Queen Charlotte Strait (QST) and the Outer Fiordland (OUF) are the 5 major ecosections that occur primarily within the Central Coast Plan Area, and were the focus of the CCPAT’s analysis (see Figure 5). Further information on the Ecosection and Biogeoclimatic framework can be found in Appendix II.

The basis for the conservation gap analysis is the ecosection description which provides a baseline inventory of the biophysical features of the landscape. The CCPAT described each ecosection according to its physiography, geology, hydrology, biogeoclimatic zone and subzones, broad habitat classes, characteristic fish and wildlife species, and special features.

Gaps in ecosection representation were identified by comparing the features found in existing protected areas to those of the ecosection in which they were located. Some gaps are more critical to fill than others. For example, some habitats, biogeoclimatic units, and features are less widely distributed (rare) and others are more disturbed (threatened). Since formal inventories are incomplete in this region, local knowledge was utilized for many of the assessments.

Once the conservation gaps were identified, the original study areas (1992) and areas of interest were described and assessed according to the following criteria:

Naturalness - The extent to which the area is unaffected by human development and disturbance (areas with greater than 25% disturbance were not accepted for further evaluation);

Representativeness - The extent to which the area represents the biophysical features of the ecosection, especially its ability to adequately capture the full range of biogeoclimatic units;

Diversity - The richness of the area in terms of its range of biological and physical characteristics, compared to the ecosection overall;

Viability - The ability of the area and its values to be maintained in perpetuity. Key considerations include size, shape, adjacency, and watershed integrity;

Figure 5: Ecosections of the Central Coast Plan Area.

Vulnerability - The risk of permanent loss of a biophysical element or feature if the area is not protected (e.g. critical habitat for rare or endangered species); and,

Significance - The rating of the area's or its feature’s rarity, scarcity or uniqueness on a provincial, national or global scale.

The CCPAT’s top priority Goal 1 study areas for ecosystem representation for the Central Coast include; Duke of Edinburgh Extension and Deserters and Walker Group (Queen Charlotte Strait), Khutze (Kitimat Ranges), Smokehouse and Ahnuhati Complex (Northern Pacific Ranges), and Koeye and Spirit Bear (Hecate Lowland). Other Goal 2 study areas, selected in part for their ability to fill conservation gaps, are found in Appendix VI, "Primarily Conservation".

4.2.2 Recreation Gap Analysis

The Tourism Resource Inventory was a key information tool used in defining and analyzing potential sites, along with the Recreation Opportunities Spectrum, Recreation Features Inventory, cultural heritage studies, assessments and inventories, and local/expert knowledge. The Central Coast Plan Area consists of two broad types of recreation experiences; coastal and uplands. For the purposes of identifying Areas of Interest for the Central Coast, the plan area was further sub-divided into four sub-regions:

The Midcoast Zone: the coastal portion of the Mid-Coast Forest District. It is characterized by low-lying rugged shorelines on the outer coasts and steep-sided fjords penetrating deep inland.

The Cape to Cape Zone: stretching from Cape Caution in the north to Cracroft Point at the narrowing of Johnstone Strait. While it shares many biogeoclimatic characteristics with the Midcoast Zone, it has the advantage of better accessibility due to its proximity to the northern Vancouver Island ports.

The Straight Islands Zone: the southern-most of the coastal zones, reaching from Cracroft Point down to Bute Inlet. Its physical characteristics include less shoreline variety and generally steeper shorelines.

The Inland Ice Zone: reaches into the Kitimat and Coast Ranges, and is typically higher-elevation with glacially-carved river valleys.

The analysis considered each zone’s:

physical and recreational characteristics;
opportunities for recreation use and appreciation;
recreation management priorities;
key recreation settings; and,
key recreation values and potential.

Overall, the principle concerns for providing good recreation/tourism experiences in the Central Coast include:

provision of secure anchorages;
provision of on-shore recreation opportunities near anchorages;
provision of high quality visual experiences; and,
provision of high-success saltwater fishing opportunities.

Gaps in representation were identified by assessing the values inherent in existing Protected Areas relative to those of each zone. Area of Interest identification and evaluation was largely based on the area’s uniqueness, threat to loss of value, significance to existing programs and plans, and efficient delivery of service.

Revised study areas selected mainly for their ability to fill recreation gaps are described in Appendix VI, "Primarily Recreation".

4.2.3 Cultural Heritage Gap Analysis

The CCPAT attempted to identify both First Nations cultural heritage values and features and post-contact areas of historical significance. Cultural heritage information documented for the PAS to date is limited for both First Nations and post-contact settlement history, particularly as it relates to First Nations’ cultural values. The cultural heritage information presented in this report is therefore cursory and is based upon the collective knowledge of CCPAT members and local government staff. The LRMP process is expected to identify additional cultural heritage information for consideration. In the absence of a detailed analysis, the CCPAT only identified known high value heritage features. The CCPAT is keenly aware that First Nations are best able to determine which First Nations’ cultural features are most appropriate for protection.

Revised Study Areas which capture known high value cultural heritage features include Port John Archaeological Site, Ellerslie Lake/Harbours, Koeye, Spirit Bear, Thorsen Creek, Restoration Bay, Carter Bay, and Yorke Island.

4.2.4 Goal 2 (Special Features) Analysis

Special features are biophysical or physical elements which are rare, scarce or unique. While many of these elements may have been captured within the study areas resulting from the "coarse-filter" gap analysis for Goal 1, a more focused, albeit preliminary, "fine-filter" gap analysis (Goal 2) was carried out to address a range of special conservation, recreation and cultural heritage features.

Special feature areas are generally small (i.e., less than 1,000 hectares of land), however, some special features require several thousand hectares to be adequately represented or protected. Special features are generally identified from inventories of the following kinds of elements:

rare biophysical elements (e.g. species, sub-species, populations and habitats);

biologically exceptional sites (e.g. important seasonal or migratory breeding, feeding, resting, or wintering habitats);

physically exceptional sites (e.g. unique landform, physical or hydrological features);

paleontological resources (e.g. fossils)

provincially rare, scarce or unique recreation features (e.g. safe anchorages, hotsprings);

areas that meet demand for recreational opportunities (e.g. travel corridor sites, fishing streams and lakes); and,

important cultural heritage structures, traditional use sites or archaeological sites.

The degree to which a special feature area was evaluated as ‘special’, and thereby warranted further consideration under PAS, was based on the following criteria:

Rarity, scarcity, and uniqueness (provincial to international significance);

Viability;

Vulnerability and

Quality.

Summary tables for Goal 2 (special feature) study areas are provided in Appendix VI.

4.3 Ranking Areas of Interest

Once all areas of interest for each of the three components had been assessed, the CCPAT ranked the areas for their combined significance. Areas of interest which ranked highly in one or more of the three areas of gap analysis were ranked higher than those that did not. The initial set of areas of interest far exceeded the amount of area that could be placed into study area status. The CCPAT further prioritized and ranked areas of interest using the presence of provincially to internationally significant features.

4.3.1 Provincially - Internationally Significant Features

To assist in setting priorities among potential study areas, the CCPAT identified a list of provincially - internationally significant conservation, recreation and cultural heritage features in the Central Coast. The provincially - internationally significant features in this region include:

GOAL 1 (Representation)

· grizzly bear concentrations	· long, deep fiords
·salmonids - large populations	· large, unregulated rivers
· coastal temperate old forests	· kelp beds
· coastal cedar-pine wetlands/coastal muskeg (especially the sloping bog complex)	· marine corridors/ routes, anchorages
· intertidal habitats	· major navigable wilderness river corridors
· alluvial sitka spruce	· coastal/ ocean kayaking
· deep fiord and cryptodepression lakes	· sportfishing opportunities
· marbled murrelet nesting	· beaches - fine textured
· seabird habitat	· marine life, and marine island groups
· seabird/eagle/falcon systems	· Kermode bear

GOAL 2 (Special Features)

·lagoons	· unique bull trout, rainbow, steelhead, cutthroat, dolly varden and char stocks
·sheltered marine	· fossils
· estuaries	· Euchalon routes
· hotsprings	· safe anchorages
· endemic vascular plants	· marine corridors/routes
· coastal rare plant communities	· pictographs and petroglyphs
· migratory bird stops	· First Nations heritage sites
· coastal bald eagle/peregrine nesting	· archaeological sites
· bald eagle wintering concentrations	· sandy beaches - fine textured

Potential study areas that contained high quality examples of these features were given a higher priority than those that did not. The provincially to internationally significant features found in the revised study areas are documented in the study area descriptions (see Appendix V, VI and VII).

4.4 Identification of Short-Term Socio-Economic Implications

Prior to finalizing the set of study area recommendations and specific boundaries for each area, the CCPAT assessed existing land use in order to identify short term socio-economic implications of establishing a study area. CCPAT completed land status checks on each study area to identify existing tenures, such as private land and log handling/storage sites. All study area boundaries were reviewed and revised to exclude private land, Indian reserves, and private leases and licenses. These exclusions have been documented in the study area descriptions (see Appendix IV and V).However, the process of converting cadastral boundaries into TRIM data results in a small margin of error for exact boundaries of existing tenures. Any errors in this regard are unintentional and will be corrected as identified. Where such sites were not located on the periphery of the area, and therefore not easily excluded through a boundary adjustment, they were identified and mapped as exclusions within the study area. Any private land, Indian Reserves, and/or private leases or licenses that are not excluded is an unintentional oversight and will be corrected where found during the LRMP process.

The CCPAT also reviewed short-term impacts of placing an area under interim management guidelines (IMGs) on mineral development, timber harvesting and aquaculture (see Section 4.6). Even though mineral exploration is allowed on active existing tenures within study areas, there are concerns about the effect of study area designations on mineral interests. This uncertainty precipitated the revision of some boundaries to exclude active mineral tenures wherever this did not compromise the key values for which the study area was selected. Khutze is the only study area that contains existing mineral tenures.

4.5 Recommended Revisions to Study Areas

Prior to finalizing a set of study area recommendations, further reductions and/or changes to the set were made based on short term socio-economic implications of establishing study areas. Ultimately, additional trade-offs, both socio-economic and political were made during the Cabinet approval stage for the recommendations.

Recommended revisions to the original study area (1992) list were approved by Cabinet in March 1997 (see Section 5). As a result of the revisions to the original set of study areas, the total amount of land base under study area status in the plan area decreased from 22% to approximately 7%. The areas removed from Study Area status are now available for resource development (subject to normal agency approval), and include Cascade Inlet, most of Kalone Peak/Dean River, Ape Lake/Monarch Glacier, Mt. Waddington/Klinaklini River, Snootli Peak, Gunboat Passage, Blunden Harbour, and Home Bay.

4.6 Interim Management of Study Areas

The new set of study areas are subject to interim management guidelines (see Table 5). These guidelines provide short-term protection for the key values within these areas until the completion of the Central Coast LRMP. New logging, roads, sale of Crown land, and new mineral claim-staking and tenures will not occur in Study Areas during the planning process.

Table 5: Interim Management Guidelines for Approved Study Areas.

Legislation	Level A Guidelines
Forest Act	No roads, no harvesting. Fire and pest management to continue.
Mineral Tenure Act Mines Act	No new tenures. Enhanced referrals* for proposed work on existing tenures.
Petroleum and Natural Gas Act Goethermal Act	No new tenures. Enhanced referral* for proposed work on existing tenures and in the vicinity of existing tenures. Geophysical exploration may be required outside tenure locations to delineate drilling locations on existing tenures.
Land Act Range Act Wildlife Act Fisheries Act	No new tenures subject to enhanced referral* through regional Inter-agency Management Committees and future study area findings or recommendations. Existing tenures honoured, but any changes referred to Inter-agency Management Committees.
Water Act Waste Act	Applications accepted and processed, with issuance subject to Inter-agency-Management Committees’ approval.
Municipal Act	Cooperation of local governments to be sought to protect features and values on private lands.

*Referral - coordinated inter-agency review of applications for tenure and management activities.

5. Revised Study Areas

5.1 Results - Goal 1 (Representation)

As mentioned earlier, 10.74% of the Central Coast Plan Area is already protected. However, the majority of current protected area (73%) is in Tweedsmuir Provincial Park and 99% occurs in the northern portion of the Central Coast Plan Area and this area is not representative of coastal values. As a result, there were major gaps in representation. The Cabinet-approved revised study areas (1997) increase representation significantly in the five predominant terrestrial ecosections and capture many significant marine and coastal features within the Central Coast Plan Area.

Ecosection representation provides a simplified model of the gap analysis, and may miss specific ecosystems and/or provincially-internationally values such as critical wildlife habitat. Several of the new study areas are identified to fill gaps which are not apparent by looking at ecosection representation alone. These study areas if selected for protection, would increase representation levels in some ecosections which would otherwise appear to be well-represented based on percentages alone (e.g., the Kitimat Ranges Ecosection). For example:

The Spirit Bear Study Area was selected primarily to provide interim protection of habitat for the white Kermode bear and to capture representation in the Hecate Lowland Ecosection. In order to identify a logical and viable boundary, based on watersheds, the area extends into the adjacent Kitimat Ranges (KIR), which is already well-represented on an ecosection basis.

The Khutze watershed is a large, intact primary watershed with very high ecological values. Khutze has a very large and significant estuary, coastal temperate rainforests, large marbled murrelet concentrations, and is considered very important grizzly, salmon, and waterfowl habitat. Although the KIR has few remaining gaps, due to a high percentage of existing protected area, the extremely high provincially to internationally significant conservation values in the Khutze, accounts for its further consideration for protected area status.

The Ellerslie Lake/Harbours area contains many provincially to internationally significant features including safe anchorages, falls, pictographs, a cryptodepression/fiord lake, and old growth forest. The Ellerslie system has very high recreation values and significant cultural value for the Heiltsuk First Nation. The Ellerslie Lake/Harbours system also provides for ecological connectivity with Fiordland Recreation Area.

The Dean Corridor, in the Kitimat Ranges, is considered an important linkage area for grizzly bear and salmon ecosystem representation and represents the only Class 1 river on the Central Coast. Dean Corridor also represents an interior-coastal link³.

The Upper Kimsquit Study Area represents unique grizzly/sockeye salmon features found nowhere else in the province. Upper Kimsquit is a low elevation pass to Kitlope drainage, and is easily traversed by bears, goats and moose. It is a valuable wildlife linkage area. The area also has very high seasonal bald eagle concentrations, and is one of the few coastal drainages supporting resident coastal moose populations.³

Additional, highly significant Goal 1 Study Areas include the Ahnuhati Complex, Koeye, Smokehouse, Cape Caution, Ashlum-Reeve-Upper Inziana, Broughton Extension, Deserters and Walkers Group, Duke of Edinburgh Extension, and Hotsprings. These occur in less represented ecosections. For example;

The Ahnuhati Complex is the #1 priority for the representation of the Northern Pacific Ranges Ecosection, and is rated as the #1 CCPAT priority area for grizzly bear/salmon ecosystems in the entire Central Coast Plan Area (see Appendix III). It has an overall very high conservation value.

The Koeye is rated the CCPAT’s #1 priority for ecological representation of the Hecate Lowland Ecosection in the planning region (see Appendix III). The Koeye provides critical habitat for grizzly bear, salmon, and several red and blue-listed waterfowl, and contains unusually productive old-growth, coastal temperate rainforest.

The total amount of revised study areas and existing protected areas in the NPR and OUF is relatively low due to the lack of suitable candidates resulting from past resource development. The areas proposed in the NPR and OUF are particularly essential to provide some minimum level of representation of these ecosections. The under-representation of these ecosections has provided some additional area to address high priority PAS opportunities in other, better represented ecosections within the plan area. Summary tables for Goal 1 Study Areas are provided, by ecosection, in Appendix III. Detailed description, a photo and map for each area are provided in Appendix V.

5.2 Results - Goal 2 (Special Feature)

Special features are biological and physical elements which are considered rare, scarce or unique, provincially or internationally (see Section 4.2.4) While many of these elements were captured by Goal 1 study areas, several additional smaller areas were selected through the Goal 2 gap analysis process to cover a full range of special features. The following list describes the special feature characteristics which predominate the revised Goal 2 study areas:

Safe Anchorages, Marine Corridors/Routes, and Sheltered Marine - Several Goal 2 study areas were primarily selected based on their ability to enhance recreational opportunities and tourism in British Columbia, by providing safe marine passage and anchorages for boaters (e.g., Barnard Harbour, Rescue Bay, Goat Cove, Fougner Bay, Takush Harbour, Eucott Bay, etc.).

Estuaries and Wetlands - Estuaries occupy a tiny portion of the study area. Thus, they are rare ecosystems. In addition, they provide important waterfowl habitat, and are often used by red and blue-listed bird species on the Central Coast. All species of salmon spend some time in estuaries as they enter and leave the river systems. Chinook and chum fry are known to spend considerable time there before they move seaward. There are several estuaries and wetlands included in the revised study area package including the Kimsquit, Skowquiltz, Kingcome, Nekite, Stafford, Quatlena, Phillips, and Bentinck Estuaries and the Genessee and Neechantz/Machmell Wetlands.

First Nations’ Heritage Sites, and Archaeological Sites - Cultural heritage special features were considered a key consideration in Goal 2 study area selection. Port John Archaeological Site and Thorsen Creek are two examples of Goal 2 areas which contain archaeological sites, including pictographs, and petroglyphs and represent important First Nations values.

Marine Conservation - Major marine conservation features such as rich intertidal life, sea otter concentrations, critical seabird feeding concentration areas, large sea lion haul-outs, internationally significant populations of seabirds and cetaceans, and sea otter concentrations were also considered a high priority in selecting Goal 2 study areas.

5.3 Summary Statistics

Table 6 compares the amount of existing protected area and the revised study area by Ecosection. See Figure 6 for a map of the percentage of ecosections protected. Table 7 compares the amount of existing protected area and revised study area by northern and southern plan area. See Figure 2 for a map of the northern and southern boundaries.

Table 6: Protected Area and Revised Study Area by Entire Ecosection.

Ecosection	Size of Ecosection*	Existing Protected Area*	% Existing Protected Area*	Revised Study Area*	Existing PA and Revised Study Area*	% Existing PA and Revised Study Area*
Hecate Lowland	1,524,906 ha	61,370 ha	3.98%	75,125 ha	136,495 ha	8.95%
Kitimat Ranges	3,503,196 ha	646,635 ha	18.46%	112,624 ha	759,086 ha	21.67%
Northern Pacific Ranges	3,141,231 ha	68,002 ha	2.16%	125,808 ha	193,811 ha	6.17%
Outer Fiordland	437,118 ha	9,762 ha	2.23%	6,268 ha	16,030 ha	3.67%
Queen Charlotte Strait	23,198 ha	816 ha	3.52%	1,039 ha	1,855 ha	8.00%

* All sizes include land and freshwater only.

** The Queen Charlotte Sound, Nechako Upland, Nazko Upland, Western Chilcotin Upland, and Western Chilcotin Ranges are not included here because only minor portions occur within the Central Coast Plan Area.

Table 7: Total Existing PA, Original SA, and Revised SA by Northern and Southern Plan Area.

Planning Area	Size of Planning Area*	Existing Protected Area (PA)	% Existing PA	Original Study Area (1992)	% Original Study Area	% Existing PAS and OSA
North Central Coast	3,085,991 ha	509,920 ha	16.52%	603,870 ha		19.57%	36.09%
South Central Coast	1,689,226 ha	2,966 ha	.17%	435,067 ha		25.75%	25.93%
North and South Central Coast	4,775,217 ha	512,886 ha	10.74%	1,038,973 ha		21.76%	32.50%

* All sizes include land and freshwater only.

Planning Area	Revised Study Area (1997)	%Revised Study Area	Existing PA and Revised Study Area	% Existing PA and Revised Study Area
North Central Coast	207,549 ha	6.73%	717,496 ha	23.25%
South Central Coast	112,435 ha	6.66%	115,582 ha	13.19%
North and South Central Coast	319,390 ha	6.70%	833,050 ha	17.45%

The ecosection and biogeoclimatic unit representation provided by the original study areas, protected areas, and revised study areas are shown in the tables found in Appendix IV.

6. Additional Considerations

6.1 First Nations

The Government of British Columbia acknowledges and respects First Nations treaty rights and Aboriginal rights in British Columbia. Interim management guidelines will not prevent First Nations from exercising aboriginal rights and using the land and resources for sustenance food, social and ceremonial purposes (including hunting and fishing). The practice of these rights may be regulated due to conservation or public safety considerations. If land designated as a park or protected area is transferred to a First Nation as a result of treaty negotiation, for purposes inconsistent with its continuation as a protected area, then other protected areas may be designated to maintain the provincial 12%. If a First Nation maintains land as a protected area, the area will continue to contribute to the 12% provincial target.

6.2 Recreation Areas

Existing legislation permits mineral exploration and evaluation activities within Recreation Areas, under the Park Act and Mineral Tenures Act, respectively. As per the government’s Protected Areas Strategy policy, recreation areas are to be assessed by the Ministry of Employment and Investment (Energy and Minerals Division) for their subsurface resource potential. In cases where potential is assessed as "low", the area is normally upgraded to fully protected status (e.g. Class A Provincial Parks). There are two Recreation Areas in the Central Coast Plan Area which need to be addressed: Hakai and Fiordland. Although mineral potential has already been rated low in these areas, government has agreed to resolve the status of these two areas as part of the LRMP process, due to outstanding First Nations issues.

6.3 Additional Areas with High PAS Values

Several high-ranking areas of interest were not approved as study areas due to size constraints on the amount of area in the Central Coast Plan Area allowed under study area and existing protected area (i.e., 18%) and/or the significance of short-term resource development impacts/issues. These areas of interest include such sites as the Ingram-Mooto, Waump, Lockhart-Gordon, Piper, Johnston, Upper Stafford, and Green watersheds. Future land use for these areas will be further addressed through the Central Coast LRMP process. These areas, and others identified by plan participants, may be considered as potential protected areas, or as strong candidates for special resource management as a means of addressing their unique values.

Figure 6: Percentage of Ecosections Protected.

7. Literature Cited

Bergdahl, James C. (1995). Wild Pacific Salmon Runs of Nine Wilderness Areas on The Central British Columbia Coast, Their Relative Economic Value, and Potential Endangerment by Clearcut Logging. Valhalla Wilderness Society: New Denver, British Columbia.

Blood, D. and Associates. (1994). A Protected Areas Strategy for B.C.: Significant Conservation Values. Overview and Ranking of Significant Conservation Values in British Columbia. Working Draft for Discussion, Third Draft.

B.C. Parks. (June, 1996). Field Trip Report of Potential PAS Areas of Interest in the North Central Coast. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks: Williams Lake.

Central Coast Protected Areas Team (CCPAT). (1996). Central Coast Units Preliminary Sort Results. CCGT: Victoria.

Conservation Data Centre. (Jan, 1996). Spreadsheets for Occurances Rare Species or Plant Communities for the Central Coast. Conservation Data Centre: Victoria

Enns, K. A. (March 1994). Vancouver RPAT Documentation: Protected Areas, PAS Areas and Areas of Interest. Vancouver Island RPAT: Victoria.

Fenger, M. and A. Harcombe. Biodiversity, Old-growth Forests and Wildlife in British Columbia. Unpublished report, B.C. Environment: Victoria, B.C.

Fisheries Branch, B.C. Environment. (September 1995). B.C. Salmon Habitat Conservation Plan. B.C. Environment. Victoria

Henderson, C., Bindernagel, & Blood, D. (April, 1996) Wildlife Surveys in TFL 25 Block 5, 1994-95. Western Forests Products Ltd.: Vancouver.

Hunter, R.A., K.R. Summers and R.G. Davies. (1985). A rating scheme for British Columbia’s major coastal wetlands. Government of British Columbia, Ministry of Environment. File Report.

Resource Management. (1997). An Analysis of Marine Biological and Human-use datasets from the Coastal Resources Inventory. RMD: Victoria.

Leaney, A.J. and S. Morris. (1981). The Bella Coola River estuary. Status of Environmental Knowledge to 1981. Report of the Estuary Working Group. Fisheries and Oceans/Environment. Joint Co-ordinating Committee on Environmental Affairs. Pacific and Yukon Region. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Environment Canada. Special Estuary Series No. 10.

Lertzman, K, MacKinnon, A., Kremsater, L. and F. Bunnel. (1997.) Are Intact Watersheds the Best Units for Conserving Forest Ecosystems. In prep.

Lewis, K. and A. MacKinnon. (May 1992) Gap Analysis of B.C.’s Protected Areas by Biogeographic and Ecoregion Units. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Ministry of Forests: Victoria.

McKim-Fletcher, P. 1992. Bella Coola River Estuary Study, January 1992 to July 1992. Central Coast Economic Development Commission. Box 10 Hagensborg, British Columbia, V0T 1H0. 53 pp.

Meidinger, D. and J. Pojar. (February 1991) Ecosystems of British Columbia. Ministry of Forests: Victoria.

Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. (June, 1995). A Future for the Grizzly: British Columbia Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks: Victoria.

Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, and Environment Canada. (1993). State of the Environment Report for British Columbia. Ottawa. 127 pages.

Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Planning and Assessment Branch. (May 1989). Conservation of Grizzly Bears in British Columbia: Background Report. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks: Victoria.

Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Planning and Assessment Branch. (1989). Coastal Recreation and Conservation Issues and Opportunities: Background Data Summary and Discussion Paper. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks: Victoria.

Moore, Keith. (1991). An Inventory of Watersheds in the Coastal Temperate Forests of British Columbia. Earthlife Canada Foundation: Victoria.

Pacific Coast Joint Venture (PCJV). (199_). Strategic Coast Joint Venture Strategic Plan.

Planning and Assessment Branch, MOE. (Jan/March 1989). Coastal Recreation and

Conservation Issues and Opportunities: Background Data Summary and Discussion Paper [draft]. Ministry of Environment: Victoria.

Pojar, Jim, and MacKinnon, Andy (ed). (1994). Plants of Coastal British Columbia Including Washington, Oregon and Alaska. B.C. Forest Service/Lone Pine: Vancouver.

Prince Rupert Regional Protected Areas Team (PRPAT). (March, 1995). The Prince Rupert PAS Report. Prince Rupert RPAT: Prince Rupert.

Remington, D., coordinator. 1993. Coastal wetlands habitat assessment and classification for northwestern British Columbia. Contract Report for: Pacific Estuary Conservation Program: BC Environment, Habitat Conservation Fund; BC Environment, Region 5 (Cariboo) and 6 (Skeena); BC Lands; Canadian Wildlife Service; Department of Fisheries and Oceans; Ducks Unlimited Canada; The Nature Trust of British Columbia; Wildlife Habitat Canada. 115 pp.

Rimmer, D.W. & Axford, F.N. (1990). A Preliminary Evaluation of Fish Habitat and Recreational Fisheries Values in the Mainland Coast Planning Unit. Ministry of Environment, Recreational Fisheries Section: Nanaimo.

Tourism B.C. (March, 1996). Tourism Facts [handout]. Ministry of Small Business Tourism and Culture: Victoria.

Western Forest Products (WFP). (1996). British Columbia: Mid-Coast Forest Issues. WFP: Vancouver.

Whitbread, Ian. (1996). Investigation Spreadsheets for Archaeological Investigations of Areas of Interest in the Central Coast. Ministry of Small Business, Tourism & Culture, Archaeology Branch: Victoria

Whyte, Bruce. (March, 1996). CCPAT Recreation/Tourism/Parks Report (Draft 1). Recreation/Tourism/Parks subgroup of CCPAT: Victoria.

Valhalla Wilderness Society. (December, 1995). Spirit Bear at the Crossroads: A Proposal for an Ecologically Complete Marine/Terrestrial Protected Area. The Valhalla Wilderness Society: New Denver, British Columbia.

Vancouver Island Regional Protected Areas Team (VIRPAT). (March, 1996). PAS Areas of Interest for the Southern Block of the Central Coast LRMP. Vancouver Island RPAT: Victoria.

8. References

¹For the purposes of analysis, the Hakai and Fiordland Recreation Areas are considered as protected areas. Their status will be reviewed as part of the LRMP process.

²Historically, forest development in Coastal British Columbia had five major impacts on grizzly bears: 1) increased human access resulting in higher kill; 2) inadequate garbage management resulting in high kill; 3) loss of habitat suitability resulting from high rates of clear-cut logging on valley bottoms and lower slopes (followed by various silviculture techniques designed to quickly restock the site to commercial conifers); 4) alteration, fragmentation or direct loss of critical habitat; and 5) alienation of bears from preferred habitat by human activity (e.g. traffic, machine noise). Much of the human settlement and resource use along the B.C. coast is concentrated in linear corridors along high capability river valleys. Bears entering larger corridors are at high risk, potentially leading to relative isolation of populations on either side of the corridor. Although hunter harvests and problem kills do not appear to be a significant threat at first examination, the kill has been area-concentrated. Current coastal logging and silviculture practices modify grizzly bear habitat capability and contribute to reduced population densities through increased access, inadequate garbage management, and alienation and alteration of habitat. Protected Areas are therefore only a part of an overall conservation and management plan for coastal grizzly bears.

³The Dean Corridor and Upper Kimsquit study areas were primarily selected and designed to focus on the nationally-internationally significant protected area values they contain. They do not fit neatly into either the Goal 1 or Goal 2 categories, but due to their size, extent and significance, they have been grouped with the other Goal 1 study areas.

⁴References for information on coastal wetlands include: Hunter et al., 1985,Remington, 1993,McKim-Fletcher, 1992,Leaney and Morris, 1981.

Further questions or comments on this report can be directed to:

Gordon Goodman
Chair, Inter-agency Planning Team
5th Floor-808 Douglas Street
Victoria, British Columbia V8V 1X4 (250) 387-1599

[ Central Coast Reports | TOC]

Last Updated: 06/18/97