Part 2: Of Goshawks and Safeguards

By Nina Newington
May 15, 2025. Part 2 is the second in a series on A Letter Worth Reading

MLA Bowlby’s letter to constituents protesting the logging happening now in the Goldsmith Lake Wilderness Area is proving to be quite a resource for those of us trying to extract some understanding of how this government plans to meet its legal commitment to protect nature.

The bad news in this letter is the information that the government is abandoning the past practice of putting a moratorium on all harvesting, road-building and industrial activities in an area while it is being evaluated for permanent protection. No mention of this change is made. Instead we are informed:

The Department of Natural Resources and Environment and Climate Change collaborate closely to advance protection priorities while respecting existing legal harvest approvals.

And then, to address the specific outrage of the people writing to MLA Bowlby:

Let me assure you that the current harvesting activity is confined to areas already assessed as ecologically compliant, with stringent safeguards in place for species at risk and old-growth stands. (…)

The Department of Natural Resources takes its role in stewardship seriously. All harvest plans, including those near Goldsmith Lake, undergo a rigorous review process that includes consultation with the Mi’kmaq, public input via the Harvest Plan Map Viewer, and assessments to identify and protect sensitive ecological features.

In this case, the approved harvest near Goldsmith Lake involves a 32-hectare thinning operation(…)

When this particular harvest plan (AP021215E) was first approved in 2022, it covered 71 ha. That was after it had undergone the original “rigorous review process”. Since that original approval, the area to be logged has shrunk by 55% to 32 ha. What led to such a major change?

This site has been continually assessed and reassessed over the past four years by WestFor, DNR, professional lichenologists, and independent consultants.

And what did they find, all these professionals? Well, they didn’t find any of the species at risk that led to two successive amendments to that original harvest plan. Not one. Those were all identified by citizen scientists.

Any new information brought forward by the public, including reports received as recently as yesterday, is carefully examined, verified, and incorporated into planning.

I happen to know exactly which report was “received as recently as yesterday.” The letter was sent out on April 23rd but it must have been drafted on April 18th. On April 17th, I reported to DNR a Northern Goshawk nest I had discovered the previous evening in old forest close to the boundary of the cutblock that WestFor’s contractor began cutting on April 12th — AP021215E.

Goshhawk nest sighted on April 16, 2025

It’s nice to read that my report will be examined, verified and incorporated into DNR’s planning. This should include putting a year-round 200 m buffer around that Goshawk nest. According to DNR’s Field Guide to Forest Biodiversity Stewardship, Crown Forest Policy requires “No harvesting or road construction within 200 m of an active goshawk nest at all times of the year.” That will take another bite out of the already twice-amended cutblock. The one they started cutting on the 12th. Will it be too late? Have they already cut into the buffer zone?

It might not be too late because, after we set up camp on the 13th, WestFor moved the equipment further down the road to another part of that same harvest plan. The equipment has only recently moved back up to the part of the block close to the nest. Assuming DNR sent someone out to verify the nest and then applied the buffer, it is possible that the forest has been left undisturbed around that nest site.

The thing is, though, that I reported the probability of a Goshawk nest in that location to DNR last June. They had 10 months to go out and find the nest, but they didn’t do it.

To be fair, I reported the probability of a nest there to the Old-Growth Forest Coordinator within DNR, not the Wildlife Division, as I was also inquiring about whether the stand where two Northern Goshawks had just dive bombed me had been assessed as old-growth. (I never did get an answer to that question.) The dive-bombing is typical behaviour for nesting Goshawks. I included the GPS for where it happened. Did the Old-Growth Forest Coordinator forward the possible Goshawk nest information to the Wildlife Division? I don’t know.

Clearly, those “stringent safeguards” DNR claims to have in place did not extend to looking for a nest that gets a 200 m buffer in a location close to an approved harvest area before allowing logging to proceed. It was not hard to find that nest.

It’s a bit rich, in these circumstances, to brag about how responsive DNR is to reports from the public.

More about Goshawks
– Flying Tigers – Northern Goshawks
Mark Elderkin, 2011 on DNR website “At or near the top of the food chain in forested landscapes, breeding goshawks are ideal indicators of healthy ecosystems…Anyone who knows the location of an active goshawk nest should report it to the Wildlife Division at Biodiversity@novascotia.ca or the regional biologist in their area. Some or all of the nests reported will be visited to document the condition and type of forest. Goshawks tend to be extremely aggressive toward humans around their nests during breeding season, especially when your are present. Therefore, anyone doing nest checks should protect themselves by wearing a heavy jacket and a helmet equipped with a visor. All birds of prey and their nests are protected in Nova Scotia.”

– Northern Goshawk
Peter Bush, 2015, pp 180-181 in Maritime Breeding Birds Atlas, 2nd ed. “Few experiences are more thrilling (or terrifying) than hearing the alarm call of the Northern Goshawk, a loud, hollow “cuk-cuk-cuk-cuk,” as it fiercely defends its nest from would-be intruders…In the Maritimes, as elsewhere, the Northern Goshawk is found in various habi- tats, including sapling, immature, and mature coniferous and deciduous forest. The nest locations, which are often re-used between years, tend to be in mature forests with open understoreys and high canopy closure. Goshawk records came from forested regions throughout the Maritimes, including the very fragmented forests of PEI and the Annapolis Valley, although surprisingly few records came from the Valley Lowlands of NB or from southwestern NS. The probability of observation is relatively low across the whole of the Maritimes…The Northern Goshawk saw only small changes in its overall distribution, including some retraction from NB’s western Valley Lowlands, and a corresponding decline in the probability of observation in this same region. The BBS in Canada also suggests no substantial population change. Nonetheless, the species has shown some sensitivity to landscape levels of timber harvesting in other regions and is considered highly sensitive to human disturbance at nest sites. Continued monitoring of populations and of breeding success in the Maritimes could be important for this majestic bird of prey.

– NS Provincial Parks Facebook Post on Northern Goshawk
NS Provincial Parks,  April 24, 2014.

– Nesting habitat and conservation of the northern goshawk, Accipiter gentilis, in Nova Scotia
Denise B. Whynot, 1996. Master of Science (Biology) thesis Acadia University ”
ABSTRACT I investigated historical nesting records of the Northern goshawk, Accipiter gentilis, (MNRS) as well as quantitatively described the nesting area used by the goshawk in Nova Scotia at three spatial scales: nest tree (nest tree compared to the trees surrounding it), n=32; nest plot (the trees immediately surrounding the nest tree to two other comparison plots each 50 metres away), n=29; and nest landscape (30 acres around the nest centre cornpared to randomly selected comparÏson landscapes), n=22. From these data and a review of the literature, more cornprehensive conservation guidelines have been proposed for this species…“