RECLAMATION INTELLIGENCE

Walk into COR Part 2 with a multi-year record

Northeast British Columbia · BCER ESSG v1.1

ESSG monitoring runs until every performance metric passes at once. With plot-based assessment, issues tend to surface one cycle at a time. Drone-based monitoring gives you the full spatial picture earlier — so mitigation is planned once against the whole site, and closure arrives with a documented record rather than a final snapshot.

CONTEXT

The ESSG, in plain terms

The Ecologically Suitable Species Guideline (ESSG) sets BCER's minimum expectations for short-term reclamation performance metrics on Crown forested land in Northeast BC. For sites reclaimed in 2024 and beyond, those metrics must be achieved and reported as part of a Certificate of Restoration (COR) Part 2 application — now formalized as the Restoration Assessment Form under the 2026 Site Remediation and Reclamation Manual.

It's a practical framework — but operators are still working out how to assess it efficiently across a portfolio of sites, document trajectory over multiple years, and meet the regulator's spatial reporting requirements. That's where we come in.

Who we are
A small Calgary-based team spun out of UCalgary's Boreal Ecosystem Recovery and Assessment (BERA) program in 2024. We work alongside operators, QRSs, and restoration contractors — adding the spatial evidence layer to the team you already have.
BERA-built
Methods developed inside UCalgary's research program
NE BC
Focused on boreal reclamation in Northeast BC
100%
Wall-to-wall site coverage vs. plot-based sampling
QRS-led
Your consultant signs off — we supply the evidence

THE SPATIAL GAP

Late discovery tends to compound

Standard field assessment samples what's at each plot. The space between plots — where most of the site lives — stays unobserved. That gap is where issues establish unseen, and where the monitoring cycle tends to stretch.

Field sampling alone
1–5% of the site, at best
Monitoring plots capture only what's inside them
Typical spacing: 30 m on wellsites, 100 m on linear features
The other 95–99% of the site is unobserved between plots
Invasives, density gaps, and erosion establish in the unobserved fraction — unseen until they're widespread
You're measuring the site — but only where you're standing.
Field + drone together
100% of the site, every flight
Wall-to-wall LiDAR and high-resolution imagery
Every hectare classified; every anomaly geolocated
No "between the plots" — the whole site is the data
Problems identified by location, extent, and type — not by whether they happened to land inside a plot
The whole site, recorded, every year.
The shift, in three words
Census, not sampling.

The downstream consequence is a pattern, not a specific timeline. With field sampling alone, issues surface as plots happen to intersect them — typically a finding or two per cycle, each tending to drive its own response. With a drone layer added, the same issues are visible together in a single dataset, and mitigation can be scoped once against the whole picture rather than reactively across successive cycles.

Every site is different. Some close cleanly on the first cycle; others sit in monitoring for years. What the spatial layer reliably changes is the pattern of discovery — which is upstream of everything else.

The point isn't flight time. It's fewer mobilizations across the cycle, a multi-year spatial record your QRS and regulator can reference, and evidence of trajectory rather than a single closure-year snapshot.

WHERE DRONE DATA ADDS VALUE

Three improvements to the workflow you already have

We're not claiming drone data replaces field methods, or that it unlocks a regulatory shortcut. It adds three specific things — each aligned to a mechanism ESSG explicitly permits, and each hard to get any other way.

01
Influence is highest at the start

At planning and baseline, a full-site picture lets you shape the approach while it's still open — where to place species, which areas need soil work, what to correct before it sets the site's trajectory for years. Changing the plan at this stage costs almost nothing.

Your leverage over the outcome shrinks every season after. The same fix later means a return mobilization, replanting into established competition, or defending a marginal metric at closure. Early, wall-to-wall data is the cheapest, highest-leverage input you can add.

02
Early intervention

Drone data surfaces density gaps, invasive patches, erosion features, and bare ground across the whole site — not just inside monitoring plots. Issues are seen when they're small and localized, often one or two seasons before they'd surface in routine field assessment.

Earlier detection means the treatment program is planned once, as a coordinated intervention, rather than as reactive trips across multiple cycles.

03
Trajectory arguments

ESSG explicitly allows the QRS to argue site acceptance based on trajectory — evidence a site is moving in the right direction, even where a single-year metric sits close to threshold.

Year-over-year drone imagery is that evidence. Invasive cover 15% → 10% → 8% is a defensible trajectory. Plot data alone can't make that case.

The underlying strategy for overall restoration is founded on an iterative management approach based on reporting results.
BCER · ESSG

HOW IT WORKS

Four phases, one record

Each phase builds on the last. By closure, you have a single, spatially referenced, multi-year record ready to drop into your COR Part 2 package.

Phase 01
Year 0 — post-reclamation
Baseline flight
Drone LiDAR & optical acquisition
Extract terrain, stability, soil indicators
Flag priority areas for field attention
Single field visit: soils, verification, corrective plan
Phase 02
Year 2–3
Baseline regeneration
Return flight once seedlings are detectable
First measurements of density
Detect early invasive establishment
Establish a defensible trajectory baseline
Phase 03
Year 3 to closure
Ongoing monitoring
Annual or semi-annual drone flights
Year-over-year trajectory tracking
Targeted field checks where flags appear
Corrective action verified by the next flight
Phase 04
Final year
Closure
Closure field visit
Final metric assessment
COR Part 2 package assembled from the record
Spatial deliverables ready for BCER submission
Already mid-monitoring?
You don't need to be at Y0 to start. We can begin a drone record at any point in the cycle — the sooner the better. Starting monitoring in Y3 or Y4 still gives you years of trajectory evidence by closure, and catches problems that would otherwise surface late. Sites that have been in the monitoring cycle for several years are often where we add the most value fastest.

OUR APPROACH

Remote sensing and fieldwork, working together

Not every metric belongs in the air. Not every metric belongs on the ground. A credible ESSG program knows where each tool earns its place.

Lead methodWhat it coversESSG metrics
Remote sensing ledMetrics we automateSpatial, structural, and cover-based metrics that drone LiDAR and imagery measure directly, wall-to-wall, across the entire site. Seedling detection & counting, canopy & woody cover mapping, bare ground & erosion mapping, invasive species identification, terrain & microtopography modelling.Terrain · Stability & erosion · Vegetation cover · Woody density · Bare ground · CWM
ComplementaryWhere RS and field work hand-in-handMetrics where drone data flags priority areas and directs field effort, and field observations validate and refine remote sensing outputs.Plant community · Invasive & noxious species · Seedling survival · Organic matter
Field ledWhat still requires a shovelSoil properties and species-level identification need direct observation. Remote sensing can guide fieldwork to where it matters most — reducing time onsite, not replacing the visit.Soil depth · LFH · Compaction · Rooting zone · Species ID

DELIVERABLES

What shows up after a flight

Tangible products, in formats your team already uses — typically within weeks of the flight, not months. Nothing lives in a proprietary viewer your consultant can't open.

Orthomosaic imagery

Full-site optical coverage at sub-cm resolution (defined for each project). Foundational layer for extraction of all other products.

Seedling counts & density

Conifer and deciduous stems per hectare, keyed to ESSG woody density thresholds. Validated against field plots.

Invasive & problematic species maps

Polygons with species ID where visually identifiable, flagged for field confirmation.

Bare ground, erosion & density-gap polygons

Spatial flags for targeted field attention and corrective action planning.

Terrain & LiDAR derivatives

Slope, microtopography, drainage — supporting site stability and landform metrics.

Interactive dashboard + GIS files

Web dashboard for your QRS and team; shapefiles and GeoPackages for your GIS.

Woody stem density mapped on a 30 metre grid, scored against the ESSG threshold
Woody density
Stems per hectare, scored on the ESSG grid

Every woody stem is detected and classified, then aggregated into the ESSG 30 m assessment grid. Each cell is scored against the 800 stems/ha minimum, so a shortfall shows up as a located polygon — not a plot that happened to miss.

Detection is validated against field plots: conifer seedlings 20 cm and taller are found at roughly 90% recall, so the counts hold up under scrutiny.

24 of 32 plots meet the 800 stems/ha target
Site mean 2,050 stems/ha — well above the 800 minimum
Shortfalls mapped: 0.45 ha at 200 stems/ha · 0.12 ha at 0 stems/ha
Conifer seedlings ≥ 20 cm — ~90% detection recall, field-validated
How seedling detection is validated

OUR APPROACH

Remote sensing and fieldwork, working together

Not every metric belongs in the air. Not every metric belongs on the ground. A credible ESSG program knows where each tool earns its place.

What we handle
Our scope
Drone operations and data acquisition (LiDAR & optical)
AI processing and metric extraction
Field assessment components (soils, verification, species ID)
Spatial deliverables and COR Part 2-ready reporting
Liability insurance, WorkSafeBC coverage, certified drone pilots
First Nations engagement coordination (when scoped into the project)
What you provide
Your input
Site boundaries and reclamation records
Access coordination (roads, gates, weather windows)
Closure timeline and regulatory context
Your QRS for final sign-off on COR Part 2
Site types
What we assess
Wellsites — pre-closure and mid-monitoring
Linear features — pipeline ROW, seismic lines, access roads
Legacy sites stuck in the monitoring cycle
Engagement scales
What a project looks like
Single-site baseline or small pilot portfolio
Multi-site annual monitoring programs
Legacy portfolio review for operators with aging sites
What we don't do
We don't write or sign your COR Part 2 submission — that's QRS work, and a QRS should always be on your team. We don't handle your regulator relationship on your behalf. We aren't a full-service reclamation consultancy. We're a remote sensing and field assessment specialist, focused on producing the spatial evidence that makes everyone else's job easier.

GET STARTED

Let's talk about your sites

A first conversation is no-cost and usually takes 20 minutes. Bring your sites, your timelines, and your closure questions — we'll bring the rest. We'll tell you honestly whether drone monitoring is a good fit for your portfolio, or whether traditional assessment still makes more sense for your situation.