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.
