Mountain Goats and Helicopters:Implications for Heliportable Geophysical Activities

Jeff Matheson, Clint Smyth & Bill Nalder

EBA Waberski Darrow Ltd.

EBA Goat Study

Outline

A couple of pics illustrating talk

Project Background

Goat Responses to Heli

Implications

Recommendations

EBA Goat Study

OJAY Area

OJAY O&G Development Area

Veritas 3-D Seismic Program

EBA Goat Study

Canyon-Dwelling Goats

Belcourt Creek

Wapiti River

Mistanusk Creek

?

?

Goat range?

Impacts of helicopters?

EBA Goat Study

Solution

Veritas OGC

EBAWLAP

Goat Inventory &Operational Monitoring

EBA Goat Study

Objectives

• Protect mountain goats

• Determine distribution and habitat use

• Helicopter disturbance distance?

• Disturbance reduction/mitigation?

• Refine guidelines and regulations

EBA Goat Study

Inventory - Aerial

Aerial Survey

EBA Goat Study

Inventory - Ground

Ground Transects

EBA Goat Study

Inventory Results

EBA Goat Study

How many goats?

Area 23 Aug 2004 24 Aug 2004

Wapiti River 12 3

Belcourt Creek 6 10

Mistanusk Creek 5 0

Total 23 13

Aerial Survey

EBA Goat Study

How many goats?

Area Minimum Maximum

Wapiti River 22 30

Belcourt Creek 18 25

Mistanusk Creek 35 40

Total 75 95

Ground Surveys Over 10 Days

EBA Goat Study

Heliportable 3-D Seismic

Source and receiving lines

Low-impact, hand-cut seismic lines

Heliportable drilling

Recording equipment drop-off and pick-up

EBA Goat Study

Heliportable Drilling

EBA Goat Study

Recording Equipment

EBA Goat Study

Protocol (1)

1. Search for Goats

2. Begin Monitoring for Baseline Behaviour

EBA Goat Study

Protocol (2)

3. Commence Aerial Operations

4. Constant Contact With Heli and Ground Crews

EBA Goat Study

Protocol (3)

5. Record Behavioural Responses to Heli Distance

6. Terminate Operations if Goats Stressed

EBA Goat Study

Protocol (4)

• Helicopters began working far from goats and gradually moved closer.

• Disturbance was intermittent.

EBA Goat Study

Behavioural Responses

R1 No overt response

R2 Unconcerned response

R3 Curious response

R4 Concerned response

R5 Low alarm response

R6 High alarm response

EBA Goat Study

Monitoring Results (1)

0-500

501-1000

1001-1500

1501-2000

Helicopter Distance (m)

0

20

40

60

80

100P

erc

en

tag

e o

f G

oa

ts

High alarmLow alarmConcernedCuriousUnconcernedNot overt

Response

2

19

16

43

57

61126

236

57

30

1

78

24

51

25

10

EBA Goat Study

Monitoring Results (2)

• Increased levels of alarm and flight at helicopter distance under 1000m.

• Cases of helicopters operating at close range (less than 500m) with little or no apparent concern by goats.– Careful control of helicopter

movements. – Termination of helicopter use to

minimise negative responses.

EBA Goat Study

Monitoring Results (3)

• Few negative responses• Topography has a big effect• Sudden close range flight resulted in

high negative response.• In general, goat responses less than

other studies.

• Why? – Close management of heli movements– Acclimation period– Canyon topography

EBA Goat Study

Conclusions

• Helicopters can operate close to goats, provided there is operational monitoring.

• Avoid sudden close helicopter flights and begin working far from goats with a slow progression.

• Better to have longer duration, slower flights that might allow habituation.

EBA Goat Study

Recommendations

1000m buffer no-fly zone from high use area, unless goats are monitored.

For Canyon-Dwelling Goats

What about high-elevation alpine goats?

EBA Goat Study

Canyon versus Alpine

EBA Goat Study

High Use Goat Areas

EBA Goat Study

Acknowledgements

• Bill Nalder, Roberta Parson, Darren Schmidt, Jeff Matheson, Steve Moore, Clint Smyth, Derek Ebner and Karla Langlois

• Ed Schreuder of Veritas Energy Services Ltd. • Dave Robinson of Time Seismic Exchange Ltd. • Darrell Daniels of Complete Land Services Ltd. • Derek Doyle of the Oil and Gas Commission for

their support in this project. • Drillers and helicopter pilots.