Hope Bay, Nunavut

Study Objectives

Validate predicted effects of the Environmental Assessment

Are wildlife avoiding the mine area?

• Barrenland Caribou: Beverly/Ahiak (Summer - Winter) and Dolphin/Union (Winter)

• Grizzly Bear: Northeastern continental range limit. Low density, large home range

• Wolverine: Large home ranges, low population levels
  

Design

57 Cameras, June 2016 - September 2019:

• 21 in Treatment Zone < 2 km of Infrastructure

• 17 in Zone of Influence (ZOI) 2 - 10 km from Infrastructure

• 19 in Control Zone > 10 km from infrastructure

Placement considered field of view, spatial distribution, and habitat

Analysis

Generalized Additive Mixed Models

• Camera effort calculated daily, low effort months excluded (< 7 days)

• Controls for spatio-temporal variation

  • Random variables: Camera ID, Year
  • Spline smooths: Month, Easting, Northing

• Main analysis: test for significant difference between Treatment and Control Zones.

• If results were significant, use numerical distance from infrastructure to test for potential ZOI

• Two analysis options, based on data availability:

  1. Events recorded at a camera, i.e. continuous distribution
  2. Occupied cameras (at least one event in a month); binomial distribution of Unoccupied vs Occupied cameras

Caribou Events by Camera (2016-2019)

Caribou Prefer the Control Zone

• Low Caribou occupancy by Month: 4% at Treatment cameras, 6% in ZOI, and 9% in Control.

• Predicted occupancy was significantly higher in the Control Zone compared to the Treatment Zone.

• Follow-up analysis for a ZOI did not indicate a significant effect for the continuous Distance to Infrastructure variable.

• Possible difference due to landscape/terrain variables.

• Caribou occupancy is significantly higher in summer.

Grizzly Bear Events by Camera (2016-2019)

Bears, Bears, More Bears

• Moderate Grizzly Bear occupancy by Month: 20% at Treatment cameras, 28% in ZOI, and 17% in Control.

• No significant difference in the predicted number of grizzly bear events between Treatment and Control cameras.

• Bear activity is significantly higher near the Arctic Ocean (further North).

• Camera monitoring is highly effective for grizzly bears, with sufficient data to create robust models.

Wolverine Events by Camera (2016-2019)

Elusive Wolverine

• Extremely low occupancy by Month: < 1% at Treatment cameras, 4% in ZOI, and 3% in Control.

• Camera monitoring may not be effective given low density and sightings across years.

• Predicted occupancy was not significantly different between Zones, due to low occupancy across all areas.

• Wolverine occupancy is significantly higher in spring and early summer.