Revised Final Environmental Study Report (24 MB) - Gold Canyon ...

Gold Canyon Resources Inc.
Springpole Gold Project
Road Alternatives Assessment
of caribou harassment is very complex due to varying responses of caribou to human activities.
Whether caribou are habituated to human presence or disturbance may also play a significant
role in the resulting effects on a given caribou population.
7. Avoid direct mortality of adults and calves (i.e. vehicle collisions, hunting)
Access corridors have been shown to directly increase caribou mortality through vehicular
collisions (Brown and Ross 1994). With the exception of First Nations, hunting caribou has been
banned in Ontario since the 1930’s, and although poaching still occurs, gauging the amount of
poaching that occurs is difficult. Alberta and British Columbia have had some success in
reducing caribou mortalities by vehicular collisions by reducing speed limits in key areas of
caribou concentrations (West-central Caribou Landscape Planning Team 2006). To reduce the
risk of mortality, traffic volumes and speed limits will be kept to a minimum and warning devices
(i.e. deer whistles) could be installed on all vehicles. Use of the road will be restricted to a small
number of trips per day. GCU is considering placing restrictions with regard to road use in order
to satisfy concerns of local outfitters. GCU may also install monitored gates which would prevent
any access beyond what is approved in the FMP. A haulage schedule devised in consultation
with local outfitters would likely also benefit caribou, with reduced traffic during the calving
season.
Significance
The overall significance of the potential net effects on woodland caribou depends on the specific
impact being investigated. Most of the potential impacts can be considered to be low, due to the
relative certainty of the effects and the ability to mitigate most of the outcomes, however some
of the impacts will be considered to be high. The net effects on woodland caribou would differ
between the two options. The potential environmental effects that may impact caribou
populations will be localized in geographical extent. Although the duration of the potential effects
may be long-term (~20 years), they are finite and reversible through rehabilitation. Option A and
B are both located close to calving/nursery areas and within caribou wintering areas. The
impacts to any calving/nursery habitat and therefore to the species, can be considered to be
high. To mitigate these impacts, road Option A has been moved farther east to increase the
distance between the corridor and the calving lake (Dead Dog Lake). If Option B is moved
further west, away from the calving lakes it would then bisect a large wintering area. This would
reduce the impact to calving/nursery habitat, but would then increase the impact to wintering
habitat, thereby negating the mitigation effort. The northern portion of road Option A is located
near a calving/nursery area and within a wintering area. Unfortunately, as previously stated,
there are no options for mitigating these impacts, as this is the only reasonable route for road
Option A. The impact to the calving/nursery habitat for the northern portion of Option A can be
considered to be high and the impact to the wintering area can be considered to be lowmedium.
Due to the fact that the impacts to caribou calving/nursery habitat and wintering habitat for the
northern portion of Option A cannot be avoided, they are considered residual negative effects,