Trout Abundance Monitor in the Cheakamus River (Year 2)

Transcription

1 Cheakamus Project Water Use Plan Trout Abundance Monitor in the Cheakamus River (Year 2) Reference: CMSMON-2 Trout Abundance Monitor in the Cheakamus River (Daisy Lake to Cheakamus Canyon) Study Period: 2008 Golder Associates Still Creek Drive Burnaby, BC V5C 6C6 Tel: +1 (604)

2 CHEAKAMUS WATER USE PLAN Trout Abundance Monitor in the Cheakamus River (Daisy Lake to Cheakamus Canyon) Year Two (2008) Submitted to: BC Hydro Attn: Ian Dodd Vancouver Island South Regional Office 4400 West Saanich Road Victoria, BC, V8W 2P2 REPORT Report Number: Distribution: 6 Copies - BC Hydro 2 Copies - Squamish Nation 2 Copies - Golder Associates Ltd.

3 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Executive Summary BC Hydro implemented its revised Water Use Plan (WUP) for the Cheakamus River in February One of the key issues identified by the Consultative Committee (CC) was the potential impact of the WUP flow regime on resident trout in the upper Cheakamus River between the Daisy lake Dam and the Cheakamus Canyon, an area which is above the anadromous reach of the river. The CC thought that the resident trout population in the reaches downstream of the Daisy Lake Dam appeared to be somewhat more sensitive to dam operations (BC Hydro, 2002). In addition, CC members also felt that the resident trout abundance levels are an indicator of ecological health of the upper Cheakamus watershed. The CC recommended that a multi-year monitor be established to address the uncertainty of the impact of the WUP on resident trout populations immediately downstream of Daisy Lake Dam. This report documents the findings of Year 2 of a 5 year study designed to produce data to help determine if Daisy Lake Dam water flow releases affect the resident trout population located immediately downstream of the dam. This central research question will be addressed through the testing of four impact hypotheses. The parameters of interest include fish density or relative abundance, age class distribution, size-at-age, and relative condition. Ten sites, each measuring approximately 100 m 2, were electrofished using 4-pass electrofishing depletion methods to determine juvenile rainbow trout abundance between September 11th and September 30th, 2008 by a three or four person crew. Habitat characteristics and a depth-velocity transect was obtained at each site. A total of 291 juvenile rainbow trout were captured in 2008 (Year 2) during electrofishing in the Cheakamus River at the 10 sites between the Daisy Dam and the Cheakamus Canyon. Among the sites, density estimates ranged from 1.25 to 36.2 rainbow trout/ 100m 2 for age-0 fish, 0.9 to 23.2 rainbow trout/ 100m 2 for age-1 fish, and 0 to 5.4 rainbow trout/ 100m 2 for age-2 fish. Age-3 rainbow trout were only captured at Site 2 in 2008, at a density of 1.1 individuals/ 100m 2. Fry densities were higher in 2008 compared to 2007 at most stations (Sites 2 to 8) with increases ranging from 2 times (Site 7; 4.28 to 8.67 fish/100m 2 ) to 32 times (Site 3; 0.71 to fish/100m 2 ). The remainder of sites had similar fry densities in 2008 compared to Parr (Age-2 and Age 3+) densities observed in 2008 were variable, with sites showing both increases and decreases. No consistent differences with 2007 data were noted. Adult abundance was quantified using a targeted angler program on October 11th and 12th 2008 using two anglers who each fished for 5 rod hours per day for 2 days for an overall effort of 20 rod hours. A total of 10 rainbow trout were caught during this period which resulted in a catch per unit effort of 0.5 fish / hour in The 2008 catch per unit effort was lower than the 2007 value of 1.4 fish / hour. Relative spawning success as measured from adult abundance and average adjusted fry density increased from 8.8 fry/100m 2 /adult/hour in 2007 to 90.6 fry/100m 2 /adult/ hour 2008 an increase of over 10 times. This increase is reflective of the overall increase in fry in 2008 noted above. This index will be more meaningful after the collection of 5 years of data and the data statistically analyzed to determine any significant trends. Discharge data compiled for the study period show a substantially higher discharge during the early July to early- August period in 2007 compared to the same periods in This observed difference in discharge will be further explored in future years to assess its potential significance to rainbow trout abundance. There is relatively limited information on rainbow trout above the anadromous barrier on the Cheakamus River. The results of this study will help establish a baseline of information on rainbow trout parameters within the system. Results from subsequent years will also be used to detect patterns of rainbow trout abundance in the Cheakamus River between the Daisy Lake Dam and Cheakamus Canyon. Statistical testing of the four impact hypotheses of this monitoring program will be undertaken in the final report in Year 5. Report No

4 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION Background Pre-WUP and WUP Minimum Flow Releases Purpose and Objectives METHODS Sites Fish Capture Multiple-pass Electrofishing Adult Enumeration Fish Processing Habitat Assessment Ageing of Juvenile and Adult Rainbow Trout Data Analysis Data Management Fish Density Estimates Probability of Weighted Useable Area Adult Abundance Size-at-Age Relative Condition Relative Spawning Success Daisy Lake Dam Water Discharge RESULTS General Site Conditions Length / Frequency Distribution and Age Classes Juvenile Density Estimates Adult Abundance Size at Age of Juvenile and Adult Rainbow Trout Relative Condition of Juvenile Trout Report No i

5 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR 3.7 Relative Spawning Success Daily Average Discharge from Daisy Lake Dam DISCUSSION RECOMMENDATIONS CLOSURE REFERENCES TABLES Table 1: Overview of the Minimum Flow Release Requirements Prior to the Cheakamus Water Use Plan and under the Cheakamus Water Use Plan Regime... 2 Table 2: Number of fish and proportion of fish in each age class of rainbow trout sampled by electrofishing in the Cheakamus River in 2007 and Table 3: Population Estimates and Estimated Densities of Juvenile Rainbow Trout in the Cheakamus River from Multi- Pass Electroshocking Methods Table 4: Probability Of Use and Adjusted Density For Age 0 Rainbow Trout At Each Site Electrofished (Adjusted Fish/100m 2 = Population Density Divided By The Probability Of Use) Table 5: Average Fork Lengths And Predicted Fork Lengths (FL) For Each Age Class Of Juvenile And Adult Rainbow Trout Using The Von Bertalanffy Growth Curve Table 6: Average Condition Factor of Juvenile Rainbow Trout for Each Age Class Caught By Electrofishing in the Cheakamus FIGURES Figure 1: Sampling Site Location Map. Figure 2: Mixed distribution fit to 2008 Cheakamus River rainbow trout data. The blue line is the binned lengthfrequency data, the green line outlines the summed mixed distributions, and the red triangles denote the mean length for each age class (0, 1, 2 and 3+). The red lines represent the probability density distribution for each age class. Figure 3: Length frequency distribution for all rainbow trout captured on the Cheakamus River in the 2007 and 2008 by electrofishing. Figure 4: The von Bertalanffy growth curve for rainbow trout captured in the Cheakamus River in Estimates of parameters used t0 = 0. Figure 5: Daisy Lake Dam Average Daily Water Discharge in m3/s for 2007 and 2008 APPENDICES APPENDIX I CHEAKAMUS RIVER RAINBOW TROUT MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATES APPENDIX II SITE DESCRIPTION, DEPTH-VELOCITY TRANSECT AND FISH CAPTURE DATA Report No ii

6 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background BC Hydro operates the Cheakamus generating facility which consists of the Daisy Lake Dam and Reservoir and the Cheakamus Powerhouse connected by an 11 km tunnel through Cloudburst Mountain. The Daisy Lake Dam and Reservoir are located on the Cheakamus River about 40 km north of Squamish. BC Hydro initiated a Water Use Plan (WUP) process for the Cheakamus Generating facility originally in 1996 (BC Hydro, 2005) but was put on hold when Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) placed a Flow Order that specified that minimum flows be discharged from Daisy Lake Dam. The WUP was again initiated in 1999 and a Consultative Committee (CC) was established in June 1999 to oversee the WUP planning process (BC Hydro, 2002). The CC process and its final report were completed in May of 2002 without complete consensus. BC Hydro submitted a revised WUP to the Comptroller of Water Rights in October 2005 which was subsequently approved along with a recommended monitoring plan to address key issues and uncertainties identified by the CC. During the WUP, the CC established a Fisheries Technical Committee (FTC) to examine issues and uncertainties of the potential impact of changes in the WUP on fish below the Daisy Lake Dam (BC Hydro, 2002). The FTC first conducted preliminary studies to understand the distribution of fish within the Cheakamus watershed. They then used this information to develop a set of impact hypotheses about the impact of dam operations on fish populations and aquatic ecosystems. In particular, these studies and models indicated that the resident rainbow trout population in the reaches downstream of the Daisy Lake Dam appeared to be somewhat more sensitive to dam operations (BC Hydro, 2002). In addition, CC members also felt that the resident trout abundance levels are an indicator of ecological health of the upper Cheakamus watershed. The uncertainty surrounding the relationship between discharge from Daisy Lake Dam and the quantity of fish habitat and the resulting trout abundance was a key issue for the CC. The potential impact of the change in the WUP flow regime on trout abundance is uncertain because: 1) The actual differences in discharge downstream of Daisy Lake Dam between the Cheakamus WUP and pre-wup flow regime are uncertain, and; 2) The impact of the pre-wup condition is uncertain due to limited historical sampling data. The lack of baseline data of the resident trout population downstream of Daisy Lake Dam coupled with the CC s rationale for the importance of a healthy resident trout population in the upper Cheakamus led to the need for a trout abundance monitor as part of the Cheakamus WUP monitoring program. BC Hydro subsequently incorporated a 5 year trout abundance monitor as one of the 10 monitors funded under the Cheakamus WUP. This report summarizes the results from Year 2 (2008) of this 5 year study. This project is a joint effort between Squamish Nation, the Squamish to Lillooet Sportfish Advisory Committee (SLSAC), and Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder). Squamish Nation provided overall direction and management of the project, with technical support from Golder. Two Squamish Nation fishery technicians assisted with all sampling and data collection and data compilation. The SLSAC provided one sports fisher to participate with a Squamish Nation angler in the adult trout enumeration component of this monitor. Golder provided the Project Biologist and technical oversight of the monitor s design, execution and reporting. The project team helped to foster and strengthen an already strong stewardship base in the Squamish River watershed. Report No

7 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR 1.2 Pre-WUP and WUP Minimum Flow Releases Table 1 presents the minimum flow requirements for the WUP flow regime and the pre-wup flow regime in the Cheakamus River. Table 1: Overview of the Minimum Flow Release Requirements Prior to the Cheakamus Water Use Plan and under the Cheakamus Water Use Plan Regime Minimum Flow from Daisy Dam Pre-WUP (m 3 /s) WUP (m 3 /s) Jan 1 to Mar Apr 1 to Oct Nov 1 to Dec Additional Flow Releases Based on inflows to Daisy Lake Reservoir Based on flow requirements at Brackendale Gauge While changes in flow required to maintain the minimum flow at Brackendale are unpredictable and can create variability in the flow regime experienced by the trout population, the impact of these short term fluctuations is not expected to be biologically important (BC Hydro, 2007). These short-term fluctuations are well within the range found in the natural environment. For this reason, this monitor will be concerned only with the impact of changes to base flow releases on the resident trout population, and short-term fluctuations will largely be ignored with the exception of flood flow releases, which could have an impact. 1.3 Purpose and Objectives The potential impact of the change in the annual flow release requirements as outlined in Table 1 on resident trout populations is uncertain largely due to a lack of baseline data on the impact of the pre-wup flow regime. The overall purpose of this five year monitoring program is to answer the following fish management question: Do Daisy Lake Dam water flow releases affect the resident rainbow trout population located immediately downstream of Daisy Lake Dam? The parameters of interest include fish density or relative abundance, age class distribution, size-at-age, and relative condition. This management question is addressed through a test of four impact hypotheses that relate to three key phases in the life history of rainbow trout: spawning success, summer rearing (growth and survival), and over-wintering survival. Direct measures of these parameters are outside the scope of this monitor. This study will therefore rely on the use of indicator variables to test the following four hypotheses: H o 1: Relative spawning success, as indicated by fry density at the time of sampling, is not correlated with average (or some other summary statistic) discharge during the spawning, incubation, emergence, and early rearing phases of development. H o 2: Relative rearing success, as indicated by relative condition, size-at-age, and abundance, is not correlated with average (or some other summary statistic) discharge during the summer growth season. Report No

8 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR The following two hypotheses are used as a general test of the assumption that resident trout populations are not impacted by the change to WUP base operations. H o 3: Relative spawning success, as indicated by fry density at the time of sampling, remains stable or increases through time following implementation of the WUP. H o 4: Relative rearing success, as indicated by relative condition, size-at-age, and abundance, remains stable or increases through time following implementation of the WUP. Since this is a five year study, this annual monitoring report for Year 2 (2008) will focus on summarizing the methodology, results and overall findings from Year 2, as well as qualitative comparisons to Year 1 (2007). Statistical testing of the above four impact hypotheses will not be completed until the final report in Year 5. Project Scope The trout monitoring program for the Cheakamus River assumes the following: The study area will be restricted to the upper section of the Cheakamus River bounded by Daisy Lake Dam at its upstream end and the start of the canyon reach at its downstream end. The resident trout population will be the focus of the monitoring program; all species captured will be documented. Data analyses will be conducted on resident trout species only. The monitor will be carried out annually for five years. Sampling will be carried out over a two week period at a standardized time of the year. A data report will be prepared annually summarizing the year s findings. Report No

9 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR 2.0 METHODS This study utilized two programs for catching rainbow trout in the Cheakamus River and followed the methods proposed in the Terms of Reference (TOR) (BC Hydro 2007). The first program, a multi-pass electrofishing program, was used to catch juvenile rainbow trout at ten select sites located between the Daisy Lake Dam and the Cheakamus Canyon. Methodology followed that of similar past studies (Ptolemy et al 2006, Riley and Korman 1999) and also consisted of guidance from BC Hydro (Brent Mossop and Ian Dodd) and Ministry of Environment (MOE: Ron Ptolemy) staff. The second program was an angling program that targeted adult rainbow trout in the Cheakamus River from the confluence of Rubble Creek to the Cheakamus Canyon. Data obtained from these two fish capture programs were used to deduce the parameters in question: density, size-atage, relative condition and relative spawning success. Prior to conducting field work in Year 1, Golder crew members attended a session on the Coquitlam River with Ron Ptolemy (MOE) to align field methodology to be used with standardized electrofishing methods used by MOE. 2.1 Sites Ten representative sites located from Daisy Lake Dam to the anadromous fish barrier (Cheakamus canyon) were selected for electrofishing during Year 1 (2007) of this study (Figure 1). As described in the Year 1 report (Squamish Nation, 2007), field reconnaissance and the review of relevant literature contributed to the selection of these ten sites. A pilot snorkel survey was conducted on September 12th, 2007, but was found to be ineffective for site reconnaissance. Sites were chosen in 2007 based upon a stream bank reconnaissance of factors such as suitability for backpack electroshocking, accessibility, distribution throughout the project area and suitable fry and parr habitat characteristics (i.e. riffles, cascades, pools). Each site sampled in the Year 1 study was resampled during Year 2. Locating each site was completed using GPS coordinates, site flagging, and photographs from Year Fish Capture Multiple-pass Electrofishing Sites were sampled between September 11th and September 30th Fish capture methods replicated, as closely as possible, those employed in 2007, with few exceptions. The crew consisted of Rob Hoogendoorn, R.P.Bio. from Golder replacing Heather Lamson as the crew lead, with Max Schuetz (Golder), Allen Lewis II (Squamish Nation) and Allen Lewis III (Squamish Nation) assisting. As recommended in the 2007 report, the block nets used in 2007 (15 m long and 3 m high, mesh sizes of 1mm and 4 mm) were replaced with block nets that were much lighter and easier to transport (15 m long by 2 m high, mesh size of 5 mm). Additionally, as recommended in the 2007 report, four passes were conducted at each site, with the exception of Site 3 and 9, where 3 passes were conducted due to low fish capture during pass 2 and 3. While focusing on minimal disturbance to fish, sites were enclosed using block nets prior to fishing to prevent immigration and emigration during multiple-pass depletion. A 15 m long net was erected at the downstream boundary first with the shore line angled slightly downstream. The nets were held in place with a series of guy ropes, bipods and anchors, with the lead line knitted closely to the bottom using several boulders as weights along the lead line. A 15 m net was then erected at the upstream boundary of the site and anchored in a similar fashion. This net was also used to close off the site to the off shore side by folding around the upper, mid channel corner of the site and attaching to the downstream net. Report No

10 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Some sites had variations of the methods described above. Sites 1 and 2 were located in a side-channel and full enclosure was acquired using a block net at upstream and downstream extents, with both sides bounded by shoreline. At Site 6, the off-shore side of the site was too fast to enclose using a block net, and was too swift to be used by fry. However, a ¾ inch stretch mesh nylon gillnet was employed along the outer margin to retain parr. Site 8 was located at a bend in the river where eddy currents were strong. Instead of a rectangular shaped site, this site was triangular in shape, with ends of the block nets wrapping and anchoring at the point of the triangle, at the furthest point from the shore. Electrofishing methods used were aligned with MOE standardized methodologies, as noted previously. The crew was equipped with a Smith Root 12B electrofishing backpack unit with a 25 cm diameter anode ring and a 3.2 m long cathode. For each pass, sites were electrofished in a pattern starting from the downstream end and fishing upstream sweeping the site in a zigzag pattern. Upon reaching the top of the site, a downstream sweep which ended at the downstream shore corner completed the pass. If the site was particularly wide, it was sectioned into quarters and fished similarly starting with the bottom outside corner to the bottom inside corner to the upper outside then upper inside and sweeping down in a similar pattern. Fish captured during each pass were immediately processed before the next pass. Electrofisher settings for pulse width and voltage settings were similar between years, while frequency settings were slightly higher in Level of effort for each pass, measured in electrofishing seconds, was also similar between years. Electrofisher settings and level of effort for 2008 are provided in Appendix II Adult Enumeration Adult rainbow trout enumeration was conducted on October 11th and 12th 2008 by a two person team consisting of Michael Lewis (Squamish Nation) and Clint Goyette (SLSAC). Michael Lewis replaced Allen Lewis III for this year s adult angling. Allen Lewis III s fishing effort was not included in the 2007 data analyses because he lacked fly fishing experience and subsequently was not able to catch any fish over the 2 day period. The Cheakamus River was fly-fished at four sites from Rubble Creek to the Cheakamus Canyon. All four sites were the same sites fished in 2007 and were close to juvenile Sites 2, 3, 8 and 10. Each day, six hours were spent on the river from 10:30 AM to 4:30 PM. However, of the six hours, about five hours were actually spent fishing; time spent moving between fishing sites, note taking and taking scale samples from fish accounted for the other hour. Total fishing effort over two days was therefore 20 hours. During the angling, flies which yielded fish included Hare s Ear (dark brown), Czech Nymph (fluorescent green), Tom Thumb (orange belly), Tom Thumb (fluorescent green belly), Wooly Bugger (black with green bead), CDC Mayfly, and Wet Fly with red tag. 2.3 Fish Processing Fish were processed using the same methods employed during 2007 sampling. Juvenile fish captured by electrofishing were anaesthetized in a clove oil dilution or using Alka-Seltzer and identified to the species level. Fish were measured to the nearest 1 mm fork length and wet weighed to the nearest 1 g. Scale samples were collected on random samples of rainbow trout for the purposes of ageing. Once processed, the anesthetized fish were allowed to recover and were released downstream of the site boundaries for the first three passes, and to the site after the last pass. Additional fish processing completed in 2008 consisted of dissecting 14 rainbow trout selected from the total catch for the collection of stomachs. The stomachs were provided to Limnotek as part of the Cheakamus River Benthic Community Monitoring (Monitoring Program #7) for the Cheakamus Water Use Plan. Report No

11 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Adult fish caught by angling were measured for fork length but were not weighed to minimize handling. Scale samples from a total of ten adult fish were taken over the course of the angling to add to the juvenile samples for age determination. 2.4 Habitat Assessment Habitat assessments were carried out at all electrofishing sites and consisted of filling out Site Cards standardized by the Resource Inventory Committee (RIC). Additionally, sample site habitat description cards supplied by Ron Ptolemy, Ministry of Environment, were filled out. Depth and velocity were measured along transects at 0.5 m intervals at each site with a flow meter (Global Water Instrumentation Inc., Model FP101 flow probe). Photographs were taken to document the site conditions during sampling. Site location was recorded in UTM coordinates using a handheld GPS, as in Ageing of Juvenile and Adult Rainbow Trout Scales were processed in accordance to procedures described in Mackay et al. (1990). All scales were aged at the Golder fish ageing laboratory in Castlegar, B.C. Scales were temporarily mounted between two slides and examined using a microfiche reader. Where possible, several scales were examined and the highest quality scale was digitally scanned and saved as a JPEG-type picture file. All scales were examined independently by two experienced individuals and ages assigned. If assigned ages differed between the two examiners the sample was re-examined jointly by both examiners to establish a final age. Of the 301 rainbow trout (juveniles + adults) captured on the Cheakamus River, 55 were assigned an age class through scale-based ageing. The remaining fish were not directly aged, but were assigned ages using finite mixed distribution fitting methods MacDonald and Pitcher (1979). The finite mixed distribution fitting was performed in R version (R Development Core Team 2008) using the package mixdist version (MacDonald and Du 2008). One fish was excluded from the data prior to the mixed distribution fitting due to an erroneous, recorded length; it was measured to be just 0.7 mm. One other fish appeared to have an incorrect age assigned to it when the length vs. age data was plotted (47 mm aged as a 1 year old). This fish was retained in the data set, but was considered un-aged for the purposes of the model fitting. Therefore the aged subsample of fish used to inform the fitting process was made up of 53 fish or 17.5% of the sample. After a preliminary fitting, three more fish were cut from the data set to avoid errors in the fitting procedure, since these fish which were substantially larger than the other fish (305, 310 and 325 mm respectively) and no un-aged fish of equivalent length were present in the data set. The three fish removed from the sample were the only aged fish to be classed as age-4 adults, and the only fish in the sample of that size. Therefore, only four age classes were able to be fitted to the data; age-0, age-1, age-2 and age-3+. In 2007 there were sufficient large aged fish to allow the mean length and standard deviation (SD) of 5 age classes (age-0 to age-4) to be estimated. The number of age classes represented in the sample and the number of age classes that will be able to be estimated using mixed distribution fitting will vary in each year of the sampling program depending on the distribution and abundance of the sampled fish. The starting parameters for fitting the data were obtained by using the aged fish. The mean length for each age class, the proportion of aged fish in each age class and the standard deviation around the mean length were extracted and used in the fitting. Three probable distributions were fitted to the data; the normal, lognormal and Poisson. The best fitting distribution was selected and the fit iterated 10 times to allow the parameters to fit the data better. Report No

12 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR The best fitting model was used to assign a set of conditional probabilities to each unaged fish. The set of conditional probabilities are the probabilities that the fish belongs to each age-class conditional on its length. The conditional probabilities were summed by age-class to estimate the total number of fish in each age class. 2.6 Data Analysis Data Management Data were entered into excel spreadsheets developed by Golder for the project and into an Excel database designed by Ron Ptolemy (MOE). The latter database calculates Weighted Useable Area (WUA) from depthvelocity transects and standardizes the input and presentation of data to that of other electrofishing removal depletion studies throughout BC. Habitat information collected on standard RISC site cards was entered into a Fisheries Information Summary System database Fish Density Estimates Population estimates were calculated from maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) procedures (Riley and Korman 1995) using a program developed and supplied to the project by BC Hydro. The MLE procedure involves using fish removal data from each electrofishing pass to calculate the population size (or total number of fish) that would have been captured if sampling continued until no fish were remaining at the site. The program enabled the user to choose Bayesian analysis if the pattern of removal departed significantly from expected values (CV>0.25). Estimates were given for each year class of rainbow trout and for any other species found at each site. Standard Error and Coefficient of Variation were shown for each population estimate. Density estimates were calculated based on the area of each site and were reported as fish/100m 2 for each rainbow trout age class Probability of Weighted Useable Area To deal with the inherent variability in rainbow trout age-0 abundance at the same site among years due to hydraulic and habitat changes, raw population density was divided by a weighted usable area fraction, using methodologies designed by Ptolemy, et. al.(2006). Weighted usable area (WUA) was computed using depth/velocity data input into spreadsheets. Standardized age-0 densities were computed as observed density/wua (or probability of useable area) for among year site comparisons. These methods were not applied to age classes older than age-0 as habitat use is more greatly affected by factors such as complexity than depth and velocity (Ptolemy, Pers. comm. 2007) Adult Abundance Adult abundance was reported as Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) calculated by dividing the total catch by the total level of fishing effort (rod hours) for both anglers. As previously noted, Allen Lewis III s fishing effort was not included in the 2007 data analyses. The CPUE was therefore based upon only Clint Goyette s fishing effort and total catch. Report No

13 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Size-at-Age Length-at-age growth relationships were generated for rainbow trout by averaging the length for each age-class and by using the von Bertalanffy growth model (Ricker 1975). The addition of 0.5 to the age category (i.e., age-0 fish are presented as age-0.5) allowed the length-at-age regression curve and the Y-intercept to more accurately reflect the actual age of the fish, given an assumed hypothetical hatch date of March 1st Relative Condition Relative condition was calculated using the Fulton s Condition Factor which is an indicator of the plumpness of a fish (Lagler 1956). The coefficient of condition (K FL ) is calculated for each fish as: K FL = (W x 100)/ L 3 where W is weight in grams and L is the length in cm of the individual fish. Condition factors were then averaged for each age class. Differences in condition between age classes were assessed by ANOVA Relative Spawning Success Ideally, a stock/recruitment model would be developed to determine relative spawning success (i.e., Ricker, 1975); however, the data collection required for the development of such a model is beyond the scope of this project. In this monitor, relative spawning success is determined by applying an indicator variable which is essentially a measure of recruits per spawner. Relative spawning success was therefore calculated as the average density of rainbow trout fry (age 0+) at the 10 sites and adjusted for WUA divided by adult abundance as measured by the catch per unit effort for the same year. This assumes that adult abundance, as measured in the angling survey in October 2008, is an index of the number of rainbow trout spawners that would have spawned in Spring 2008 and produced the fry that were sampled at the 10 sites by electrofishing in September The data is not to be interpreted as an actual measure of spawning success but strictly as an indicator and is reported for comparison to future year s data Daisy Lake Dam Water Discharge BC Hydro provided the daily average discharge flow data from Daisy Lake Dam for this study which was then developed into a graphical presentation (See Figure 5). Report No

14 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 General Site Conditions Sampling was conducted in 2008 from September 11th to September 30th, and was similar to the September 13th to 20th sampling period in River discharge conditions prior to and during the sampling period were variable between years. Discharges prior to the Year 1 (2007) field program were variable and unexpectedly high (as high as 45 m 3 /s) and sampling had to be postponed to enable sampling during a more typical seasonal discharge rate (See Section 3.7 and Figure 5). Discharge rates from Daisy Lake Dam began to decline in mid-september Shortly thereafter, the field program proceeded so that it could be completed in In 2008, the sampling program was conducted from mid- to end of September and was preceded by a period of more stable and lower discharges (approx. 8 m 3 /s) than those experienced in 2007 (Figure 5). Additionally, during field sampling in 2008, it was noted that algal growth observed covering the substrate throughout each site in the study area appeared to be more extensive and abundant than in the previous year. 3.2 Length / Frequency Distribution and Age Classes A total of 291 rainbow trout captured in the Cheakamus River in 2008 during both electrofishing and angling efforts were used in the ageing analyses. The best fitting model to the 2008 data used the normal distribution with the additional constraint of a constant coefficient of variation. The mixed distribution for the rainbow trout captured in 2008 is presented in Figure 2. The total numbers of rainbow trout of each age class captured by electrofishing at all 10 sites in the Cheakamus River in both 2007 and 2008 is presented in Table 2. Table 2: Number of fish and proportion of fish in each age class of rainbow trout sampled by electrofishing in the Cheakamus River in 2007 and Age # of Fish Proportion Age # of Fish Proportion Total The total catch in 2008 of 291 rainbow trout using electrofishing (angling results removed) represents a considerable increase from 2007 results which yielded 170 juvenile rainbow trout. In particular, the number of age-0 fish increased substantially from 2007 to 2008 (from 53 in 2007 to 186 in 2008). Similarly, the proportion of age-0 rainbow trout increased substantially (from 0.31 in 2007 to 0.64 in 2008). Concurrently, the total number of age-1 fish remained similar between years (101 in 2007; 83 in 2008), while the proportion of total catch for age-1 fish decreased from 2007 to 2008 (0.59 in 2007; 0.29 in 2008). Report No

15 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR The length-frequency distribution of all rainbow trout captured by electrofishing in 2007 and 2008 is presented in Figure 3. The length-frequency distribution also shows a substantial increase in the number fry captured between 2007 and Juvenile Density Estimates A total of 291 juvenile rainbow trout were captured in 2008 during electrofishing in the Cheakamus River at the 10 sites between the Daisy Dam and the Cheakamus Canyon. Among the sites, density estimates ranged from 1.25 to 36.2 rainbow trout/ 100m 2 for age-0 fish, 0.9 to 23.2 rainbow trout/ 100m 2 for age-1 fish, and 0 to 5.4 rainbow trout/ 100m 2 for age-2 fish (Table 3). Age-3 rainbow trout were only captured at Site 2 in 2008, at a density of 1.1 individuals/ 100m 2 (Table 3). Fry densities were higher in 2008 compared to 2007 at most stations (sites 2 to 8) with increases ranging from 2 times (Site 7; 4.28 to 8.67 fish/100m 2 ) to 32 times (Site 3; 0.71 to fish/100m 2 ). The remainder of sites had similar fry densities in 2008 compared to 2007 (Table 3). Parr (Age-2 and Age 3+) densities observed in 2008 were variable, with sites showing both increases and decreases, and no consistent differences with 2007 data were noted (Table 3). Probability of use (or WUA) calculations and adjusted rainbow trout fry (Age-0) densities are provided in Table 4. The probability of use in 2008 was highest for Site 10 (0.505) and lowest for Site 9 (0.126) (Table 4). Site 8 had the highest Age-0 density (36.23 fish/100m 2 ) and adjusted density (90.0 fish/m 2 ). Adjusted densities indicate a similar increase from 2007 to 2008 at sites 2 to 8 as the unadjusted MLE fry density estimates. In addition, Site 9 showed a notable increase in the adjusted fry density from 2007 to Overall, the total change in probability of use remained similar between years. Among sites, change in the probability of use values between years was most pronounced at sites 4, 6, 8 and 10, with the greatest difference in adjusted densities between years also noted at these sites (Table 4). Report No

16 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Table 3: Population Estimates and Estimated Densities of Juvenile Rainbow Trout in the Cheakamus River from Multi-Pass Electroshocking Methods Site No. Age Population Estimate Density (RB/100m 2 ) Population Estimate Density (RB/100m 2 ) Report No

17 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Table 4: Probability Of Use and Adjusted Density For Age 0 Rainbow Trout At Each Site Electrofished (Adjusted Fish/100m 2 = Population Density Divided By The Probability Of Use) Site Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100m Adult Abundance A total of 10 adult rainbow trout were captured over two days of angling and 20 rod hours of angling effort by the two anglers in Clint Goyette caught 7 of the rainbow trout while Michael Lewis caught 3. Both of the anglers were successful while angling in four different locations. Clint Goyette fly fished over the 2 days. However, Michael Lewis used a spinning reel with spoons and spinners on the morning of first day which did not yield any fish and then changed over to flies in the afternoon and caught 1 rainbow trout. He used a fly rod on the second day and caught 2 rainbow trout. Catch per unit effort (CPUE) for Clint Goyette was 0.7 fish / hour and 0.3 fish / hour for Michael Lewis. The overall CPUE for both anglers for the 20 rod hour period was therefore 0.5 fish/hour. The 2008 CPUE is lower than the 2007 CPUE which was 1.4 fish / hour. The 2007 season included two days of angling, with 8 hours of fishing effort by Clint Goyette, and yielded 11 adult rainbow trout. The fishing effort by Allen Lewis III was not factored into the 2007 CPUE calculation due to his lack of experience. 3.5 Size at Age of Juvenile and Adult Rainbow Trout Average fork lengths and predicted fork lengths using the von Bertalanffy growth curve for each age class are given in Table 5. As in 2007, older age classes were under- represented in 2008, and due to the relative low adult capture numbers compared to juvenile captures, the asymptotic shape of the curve is not readily apparent (Figure 5). Data from future years will aid in developing the model. Report No

18 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Table 5: Average Fork Lengths And Predicted Fork Lengths (FL) For Each Age Class Of Juvenile And Adult Rainbow Trout Using The Von Bertalanffy Growth Curve Age Count Average FL Predicted FL Count Average FL Predicted FL Average fork-lengths are similar between 2007 and 2008 for several age classes and include age-0, age-1 and age-2 fish. Age-3 rainbow trout show differences in average fork-length with longer fish captured in 2008, but as previously noted, this age class is under-represented and differences are based on a low capture numbers, Predicted fork-lengths are higher in 2008 for each age class. The total catch for 2008 was higher than in In particular, a higher number of age-0 and age-2 fish were captured. The additional data in 2008 allows the growth curve to provide a better fit than in Relative Condition of Juvenile Trout Average condition factors of juvenile rainbow trout captured by electrofishing are presented in Table 6. Condition factors decrease between 2007 and 2008 for all age classes; the range in 2007 was to and in 2008 was to As with 2007 data, the condition factors from 2008 were log transformed to correct for normality prior to testing for differences between age classes. Condition was not significantly different between age classes (F(3,270)=1.88, p=0.13). Report No

19 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Table 6: Average Condition Factor of Juvenile Rainbow Trout for Each Age Class Caught By Electrofishing in the Cheakamus Age Count Average Condition Standard Deviation Count Average Condition Standard Deviation Relative Spawning Success The relative spawning success index for 2008 was calculated by dividing the average WUA adjusted fry (0+) densities for all 10 sites (see Table 4) by the CPUE recorded for adults (see Section 3.3) and gave an index value of 90.6 fry / 100m 2 / adult / hour. This compares to the 2007 relative spawning success index value of 8.8 fry / 100m 2 / adult / hour. This shows that the relative spawning success, as measured by this index, was higher in 2008 compared to 2007 by a factor of Daily Average Discharge from Daisy Lake Dam Figure 5 presents the daily average discharge from Daisy Lake Dam for 2007 and This figure shows that daily average discharges from Daisy Lake Dam were notably higher in the early July to early-august period in 2007 compared to the same periods in Additionally, as previously noted, discharges were unexpectedly high immediately prior to the Year 1 (2007) field program, and declined over the course of the 2007 field program, whereas, flows were more stable in the period prior to sampling in 2008 and remained stable over the duration of the field program. Report No

20 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR 4.0 DISCUSSION The primary objectives of Year 2 (2008) Cheakamus Trout Monitor are to summarize results of the second year of study (2008), and to qualitatively compare results to the first year (2007). In addition, summarizing the results provides an opportunity to build upon methods and results established in the first two years for density estimates, size-at-age, relative condition, and relative spawning success of rainbow trout which can be repeated and compared in the following three years of the monitor. To examine baseline conditions in the study area, a literature review was completed during the first year of the Cheakamus Trout Monitor and found limited available information exists for comparison within the section of Cheakamus River downstream of Daisy Lake Dam to the anadromous barrier. Two past studies looked at rainbow trout densities in the Cheakamus River in early fall (September/October). Riley and Korman (1995) electrofished two adjacent sites above the anadromous barrier that were in close proximity to Site 8 in this study. All of Clark s (1989a) sites were located below the anadromous barrier. An unpublished report that looked at the recreational fishery potential of the Cheakamus River upstream of the anadromous barrier (Clark 1989b) was not included for comparison as length-weight data were most likely erroneous. More recent trout abundance information has been collected as part of a fish abundance study in the nonanadromous reach of the Cheakamus River as part of Cheakamus River recovery studies conducted in 2006 following the train derailment and sodium hydroxide spill on August 2005 (Triton 2006). In this study, data analyses of length-frequency data and scale ageing information from 2007 and 2008 provided similar size ranges for rainbow trout fry between years and compared to other studies. Riley and Korman (1995) used a size range of 30 to 90 mm to identify rainbow trout fry, based on and interpretation of lengthfrequency data collected during their study. McCubbing et al. (2006) distinguished Cheakamus fry by lengths of 20mm to 79mm based on data collected on steelhead/rainbow trout in late summer and early fall on the lower Cheakamus River. A notable increase in fry densities was observed in 2008 compared to The number of age-0 fish captured in 2007 generally yielded as high or higher numbers of age-1 fish in This result would suggest a very high survival from age-0 to age-1, between 2007 and 2008, which is unlikely, since this would mean no mortality. Lower capture efficiency as a result of the crew sampling techniques or ineffective sampling gear or settings in 2007 may have resulted in the lower densities observed. These explanations are considered unlikely, given that level of effort and selected gear settings were similar overall. Lower fry densities observed in 2007 may be related to the river discharge prior to and during the sampling program. Discharges were unexpectedly high immediately prior to the Year 1 (2007) field program (as high as 45 m 3 /s), and declined over the course of the field program, whereas, in the period prior to sampling in 2008 flows were more stable (approximately 8 m 3 /s)and remained relatively stable over the duration of the field program. A higher degree of flow instability and greater lag-time following high summer discharges in 2007 may have significantly affected fry movement and behaviour, and as a result, potentially affect capture efficiency. Variability in fry densities may be caused by affects of immigration or emigration. Recruitment of rainbow trout fry from the study area has been suggested to explain an observed increase in fry density from March to October, in 2006 at sites downstream of the sodium hydroxide spill site and upstream of the anadromous barrier (Triton 2008). It has also been noted that emigration or displacement of rainbow trout downstream from Daisy Lake may be occurring and could influence the population in the study area (Matt Foy, pers. comm. January 2009). Observed differences in rainbow trout density will be further explored in future years to assess its potential significance. Despite variability between years, densities calculated in both 2007 and 2008 were similar to those observed by other studies conducted in the area. A study of the non-anadromous reach of the Cheakamus River completed in 2006 calculated fry densities ranging from 25.1 to 87.0 fish / 100 m 2 at four sites located within the study area Report No

21 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR (Triton, 2008). The upper range of fry densities calculated as part of this study in 2008 (high of 36.2 fish/100 m 2 at Site 8), were similar to those found during the 2006 study. Triton s sites were located in the vicinity of sites 5 to 8 sampled in this study. Adjusted fry densities from Triton s study (2008) were similar to mean adjusted densities calculated for corresponding sites from this study and included 75.9 fish/100 m 2 and 61.1 fish/100 m 2, respectively. Overall calculated densities from 2007 and 2008 were more consistent with those reported by Riley and Korman (1995). Riley and Korman (1995) calculated density estimates of 11.4 and 20.2 fry/100m 2 at the two sites located above the anadromous barrier, and in close proximity to Site 8 of this study. Fry densities calculated for Site 8 were similar and included 15.3 fish/100 m 2 and 36.2 fish/100 m 2 in 2007 and 2008, respectively. Condition factors decreased between 2007 and 2008 for all age classes. The range in 2007 was to while in 2008 it ranged to Reasons for the decline in condition factor in 2008 are not clear. One possible explanation may be that the increase in fish density at most sites in 2008 contributed to increased competition for food which became a limiting factor resulting in reduced growth of fish. The potential impact of increased density on reduced condition factor was noted in Triton s study (Triton, 2008) where they found that 0+ rainbow trout caught by electrofishing downstream of the anadromous barrier in the Cheakamus River in October 2006 had a significantly higher relative condition than fish caught upstream of the barrier, which also had higher fish densities. Relative spawning success as measured from adult abundance increased from 8.8 fry/100m 2 / adult / hour in 2007 to 90.6 fry/100m 2 / adult / hour 2008 an increase of over 10 times. This increase is reflective of the overall increase in fry captured in 2008 noted above. This index will be more meaningful after the collection of 5 years of data and the data statistically analyzed to determine any significant trends. Discharge data compiled for the study period show a substantially higher discharge during the early July to early- August period in 2007 compared to the same periods in This observed difference in discharge will be further explored in future years to assess its potential significance to rainbow trout abundance. There is relatively limited information on rainbow trout above the anadromous barrier on the Cheakamus River. The results of this study provide a second year of rainbow trout population information within the study area between the anadromous barrier of the Cheakamus River and Daisy Lake Dam. Results from subsequent years will also be used to detect patterns of rainbow trout abundance in the Cheakamus River between the Daisy Lake Dam and Cheakamus Canyon. Statistical testing of the four impact hypotheses of this monitoring program will be undertaken in the final report in Year 5. Report No

22 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are presented for future study years: It is recommended that the lighter, more transportable block nets used in 2008 should continue to be used. It is recommended that four electrofishing passes continue to be completed at each site in future years. Results indicate lower CV s and more accurate MLE density estimates using four passes at 8 of 10 sites in 2008, as compared to 2007, when three passes were completed at 9 sites and four passes at 1 site. Report No

23 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR 6.0 CLOSURE We trust this report provides you with the information you require at this time. Should you have any questions regarding the contents of this report, or require any further information, please do not hesitate contacting the undersigned. Yours very truly Report Signature Page Rob Hoogendoorn, R.P.Bio. Project Fisheries Biologist Rob Harrison, B.I.T. Biologist Alan Kenney, P.Eng., MBA Project Manager REVIEWED BY: Bettina Sander, M.Sc., R.P.Bio. Associate / Senior Aquatic Biologist RH/RH/AK/BS/asd \\bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \rep 0317_09 cheakamus trout abundance_final\rep 0317_09 cheakamus trout abundance_final.docx Report No

24 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR 7.0 REFERENCES BC Hydro, May Cheakamus Water Use Plan: Report of the Consultative Committee Executive Summary. URL BC Hydro, October 1, Cheakamus Project Water Use Plan: Revised for Acceptance by the Comptroller of Water Rights. URL BC Hydro, February 22, Cheakamus Project Water Use Plan: Monitoring Program terms of Reference. URL Clark, B.J. 1989a. Steelhead fry densities of the Cheakamus River during October, 1988 and resulting adult production. Regional Fisheries Report No. LM157, B.C. Ministry of Environment, Surrey, B.C. Clark, B.J. 1989b. An Assessment of the Recreational Fishery Potential of the Cheakamus River Upstream of the Anadromous Barrier: In Prep. Regional Fisheries Report No. LM156, B.C. Ministry of Environment, Surrey, B.C. Foy, Foy Senior Habitat Biologist, DFO. Personal Communication. Lagler, K.F., Freshwater Fishery Biology, Wm. C. Brown Co., Dubuque, Iowa, 1956, pp. 421 Mackay, W.C., G.R. Ash and H.J. Norris Fish ageing methods for Alberta. R.L. & L. Environmental Services Ltd. in association with Alberta and Wildlife Division and University of Alberta, Edmonton. 133p. Macdonald, P. and J. Du mixdist: Mixture Distribution Models. R package version McCubbing, D.J.F., Melville, C.C., Wilson, G., and M. Foy Assessment of the CN Rail caustic soda spill August 5th, 2005 on the fish populations of the Cheakamus River - DRAFT. Report prepared by Instream Fisheries Research Inc. Ptolemy, R.A., Ramsay, M. Peard, D. and D. Sollitt Results of Steelhead Stock Monitoring ( ) in the Bella Coola River and Implications for Population Recovery. Report prepared for Ministry of Environment and Habitat Conservation Trust Fund. 82 p. Riley, S.C. and J. Korman Juvenile salmonid monitoring in the Cheakamus River: Results of a pilot study and recommendations for monitoring design. Report prepared for B.C. Hydro (June 28, 1995). 15 pages + figures and tables. O Neal, J.A Snorkel Surveys. In D.H. Johnson, B.M. Shrier, J.S. O'Neal, J.A. Knutzen, X. Augerot, T.A. O'Neil, T.N. Pearsons Salmonid Field Protocols Handbook: Techniques for assessing status and trends in salmon and trout populations. American Fisheries Society in association with State of the Salmon. 478 p. R Development Core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing,Vienna, Austria. ISBN , URL Ricker, W.E Computation and interpretation of biological statistics of fish populations. Fish. Res. Board. Can. Bull p. Report No

25 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd., Non- Anadromous Reach Fish Abundance Monitoring Program, 2006, Final Report. Prepared for Canadian National Railway Company, February Report No

26 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR FIGURES Report No

27 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Figure 1: Sampling Site Location Map. Report No

28 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Probability Density Length Normal Mixture Figure 2: Mixed distribution fit to 2008 Cheakamus River rainbow trout data. The blue line is the binned length-frequency data, the green line outlines the summed mixed distributions, and the red triangles denote the mean length for each age class (0, 1, 2 and 3+). The red lines represent the probability density distribution for each age class. Report No

29 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Frequency Fork Length (mm) Frequency Fork Length (mm) Figure 3: Length frequency distribution for all rainbow trout captured on the Cheakamus River in the 2007 and 2008 by electrofishing. Report No

30 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR Fork Length (mm) Age (years) Figure 4: The von Bertalanffy growth curve for rainbow trout captured in the Cheakamus River in Estimates of parameters used t0 = 0. Report No

31 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR 200 Daily Average Flows (cms) Jan 22 Jan 12 Feb 04 Mar 25 Mar 15 Apr 06 May 27 May 17 Jun 08 Jul 29 Jul 19 Aug 09 Sep 30 Sep 21 Oct 11 Nov 02 Dec 23 Dec Date Figure 5: Daisy Lake Dam Average Daily Water Discharge in m3/s for 2007 and 2008 Report No

32 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR APPENDIX I CHEAKAMUS RIVER RAINBOW TROUT MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATES Report No

33 APPENDIX I CHEAKAMUS RIVER RAINBOW TROUT MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATES 2007 Rainbow Trout Density Calculations Site No. Area(m2) Age Population Estimate Population SE Population CV Parameter Estimation Population Lower CI Population Upper CI Density (RB/100m 2 ) Bayes MLE exact Bayes MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact Bayes Bayes Bayes MLE exact Bayes MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact Bayes MLE exact MLE exact Bayes MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact Bayes Project No /2

34 APPENDIX I CHEAKAMUS RIVER RAINBOW TROUT MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATES 2008 Rainbow Trout Density Calculations Site No. Area(m2) Age Population Estimate Population SE Population CV Parameter Estimation Population Lower CI Population Upper CI Density (RB/100m 2 ) MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact MLE exact Project No /2

35 CHEAKAMUS TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR APPENDIX II SITE DESCRIPTION, DEPTH-VELOCITY TRANSECT AND FISH CAPTURE DATA Report No

36 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 1 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, ELECTROFISHING SITE DESCRIPTION FORM SITE 001 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus COVER: Watershed code: log: 2 % boulder: 68 % Site number: 001 instream vegetation: 0 % Date: 29/09/2008 overstream vegetation: 30 % Surveyed by: RH/AL/MS cutbank: 0 % UTM: SUBSTRATE: Hydraulic type: riffle fines: 0 % Mainstem/sidechannel (m/s,s/c): mstm small gravel: 10 % Field gradient: - % large gravel: 10 % Stream width: 3.5 m cobble: 30 % Channel width: 60.0 m boulder: 50 % Mean depth: 0.35 m bedrock: 0 % Maximum depth: 0.50 m Mean velocity: 0.10 m*s -1 Compaction: Med Maximum velocity: 0.51 m*s -1 Sand (% of area): 0 % d90: 1.00 m Turbidity: med dmax: 1.00 m Temperature ( time): 1330 Site length: 10.0 m Stream Stage: Low Site width: 8.0 m Conductivity: - S*cm -1 Site area*: 80.0 m 2 * At non-symetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0129_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_DRAFT\Appendices\Appendix II\ Habitat Site 1 Golder Associates Page 1 of 3

37 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 1 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, DEPTH/VELOCITY TRANSECT DATA ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET (CALCULATES W.U.A. & DISCHARGE) Spreadsheet modified by Robert Harrison, Golder Associates Limited, from one provided by Ron Ptolemy. This spreadsheet applies Ptolemy WUP HSI curves, February 12, Golder Associates Ltd. SITE 001 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus UTM: Date: 29/09/2008 Watershed code: Mainstem/side-channel: side Site number: 001 Meter: Flow Meter Transect #: 1 Metered at*: 40% dfb Transect width: 10.0 m Hydraulic type: riffle Width:Mean Depth Ratio: Site length: 10.0 m Site width: 8.0 m Transect type: CS Site area**: 80.0 m 2 Stream width: 60 m Discharge: m 3 *s -1 Number of stations: 1 NOTES: * dfb = depth from bottom. ** at unsymmetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. SITE WEIGHTED MEANS ADJUSTED USABLE AREAS Mean Depth: 0.4 m Usable Width for Fry: 3.9 m Mean Velocity: 0.1 m*s -1 %Transect Usable by Fry 38.7 % Cross-sectional area : 2.3 m 2 Usable Area for Fry 31.0 m 2 Mean Probability (Fry): 38.7 % Usable Width Parr: 3.2 m Mean Probability (Parr): 31.5 % %Transect Usable by Parr 31.5 % Usable Area for Parr 25.2 m 2 This spread sheet is designed for depth/velocity transect data collected within a closed electrofishing site. DEPTH/ VELOCITY DATA FOR WEIGHTED USABLE AREA (WUA) CALCULATIONS TRANSECT DATA Cell Cell Cell Cell Usable Cell Usable Cell Cell Station Depth Velocity Width Mean Mean Prob. Width Prob. Width Area Discharge (m) (m) (m/s) Depth Velocity Fry Fry Parr Parr (m) (m) (m*s -1 ) (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 *s -1 ) \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0129_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_DRAFT\Appendices\Appendix II\ Habitat Site 1 Golder Associates Page 2 of 3

38 17/03/2009 APPENDIX I - SITE 1 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, Cheakamus River Rainbow Trout Survey, September 2008 FISH CAPTURE SUMMARY FORM Golder Associates Ltd. SITE 001 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus Start: Finish: Volts: Setting: Seconds: Site number: 001 Pass H6 342 Site length: 10.0 m Pass H6 313 Site width: 8.0 m Pass H6 313 Site area: 80.0 m 2 Pass H6 316 Species Age Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Pass 4 Total Fish Mean Weight (g) Mn Length (mm) Population Estimate Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100m 2 CV Pop'n Estimate Population Estimate SE O. mykiss O. mykiss O. mykiss Cottus \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0129_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_DRAFT\Appendices\Appendix II\ Habitat Site 1 Golder Associates Page 3 of 3

39 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 2 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, ELECTROFISHING SITE DESCRIPTION FORM SITE 002 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus COVER: Watershed code: log: 15 % boulder: 70 % Site number: 002 instream vegetation: 0 % Date: 29/09/2008 overstream vegetation: 15 % Surveyed by: RH/AL/MS cutbank: 0 % UTM: SUBSTRATE: Hydraulic type: riffle fines: 0 % Mainstem/sidechannel (m/s,s/c): s/c small gravel: 5 % Field gradient: - % large gravel: 20 % Stream width: 25.0 m cobble: 30 % Channel width: 60.0 m boulder: 45 % Mean depth: 0.21 m bedrock: 0 % Maximum depth: 0.73 m Mean velocity: 0.06 m*s -1 Compaction: low Maximum velocity: 0.24 m*s -1 Sand (% of area): 0 % d90: m Turbidity: Med dmax: m Temperature ( time): 0950 Site length: 23.0 m Stream Stage: Low Site width: 8.0 m Conductivity: 39 S*cm -1 Site area*: m 2 * At non-symetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 2 Golder Associates Page 1 of 3

40 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 2 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR,CHEAKAMUS RIVER, DEPTH/VELOCITY TRANSECT DATA ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET (CALCULATES W.U.A. & DISCHARGE) Spreadsheet modified by Robert Harrison, Golder Associates Limited, from one provided by Ron Ptolemy. This spreadsheet applies Ptolemy WUP HSI curves, February 12, SITE 002 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus UTM: Date: 29/09/2008 Watershed code: Mainstem/side-channel: s/c Site number: 002 Meter: Digital Velocity Meter Transect #: 1 Metered at*: 40% dfb Transect width: 7.0 m Hydraulic type: riffle Width:Mean Depth Ratio: Site length: 23.0 m Site width: 8.0 m Transect type: EF site Site area**: m 2 Stream width: 60 m Discharge: m 3 *s -1 Number of stations: 1 NOTES: * dfb = depth from bottom. ** at unsymmetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. SITE WEIGHTED MEANS ADJUSTED USABLE AREAS Mean Depth: 0.2 m Usable Width for Fry: 3.0 m Mean Velocity: 0.1 m*s -1 %Transect Usable by Fry 43.0 % Cross-sectional area : 1.6 m 2 Usable Area for Fry 79.2 m 2 Mean Probability (Fry): 43.0 % Usable Width Parr: 1.7 m Mean Probability (Parr): 24.6 % %Transect Usable by Parr 24.6 % Usable Area for Parr 45.2 m 2 This spread sheet is designed for depth/velocity transect data collected within a closed electrofishing site. DEPTH/ VELOCITY DATA FOR WEIGHTED USABLE AREA (WUA) CALCULATIONS TRANSECT DATA Cell Cell Cell Cell Usable Cell Usable Cell Cell Station Depth Velocity Width Mean Mean Prob. Width Prob. Width Area Discharge (m) (m) (m/s) Depth Velocity Fry Fry Parr Parr (m) (m) (m*s -1 ) (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 *s -1 ) \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 2 Golder Associates Page 2 of 3

41 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 2 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, Cheakamus River Rainbow Trout Survey, September 2008 FISH CAPTURE SUMMARY FORM Golder Associates, Ltd. SITE 002 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus Start: Finish: Volts: Setting: Seconds: Site number: 002 Pass H Site length: 23.0 m Pass H6 604 Site width: 8.0 m Pass H6 305 Site area: m 2 Pass H6 578 Species Age Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Pass 4 Total Fish Mean Weight (g) Mn Length Population (mm) Estimate Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100 2 CV Pop'n Estimate Population Estimate SE O. mykiss O. mykiss O. mykiss O. mykiss Cottus Gasterosteus aculeatus \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 2 Golder Associates Page 3 of 3

42 17/03/2009 APPENDIX I - SITE 3 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, ELECTROFISHING SITE DESCRIPTION FORM SITE 003 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus COVER: Watershed code: log: 10 % boulder: 90 % Site number: 003 instream vegetation: 0 % Date: 12/09/2008 overstream vegetation: 0 % Surveyed by: RH/AL/MS cutbank: 0 % UTM: SUBSTRATE: Hydraulic type: rapid fines: 10 % Mainstem/sidechannel (m/s,s/c): m/s small gravel: 10 % Field gradient: - % large gravel: 10 % Stream width: 40.0 m cobble: 20 % Channel width: 40.0 m boulder: 50 % Mean depth: 0.35 m bedrock: 0 % Maximum depth: 0.60 m Mean velocity: 0.39 m*s -1 Compaction: low Maximum velocity: 0.81 m*s -1 Sand (% of area): - % d90: na m Turbidity: low dmax: na m Temperature ( time): na Site length: 17.0 m Stream Stage: Low Site width: 6.5 m Conductivity: i - S*cm -1 Site area*: m 2 * At non-symetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 3 Golder Associates Page 1 of 3

43 17/03/2009 APPENDIX I - SITE 3 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, DEPTH/VELOCITY TRANSECT DATA ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET (CALCULATES W.U.A. & DISCHARGE) Spreadsheet modified by Robert Harrison, Golder Associates Limited, from one provided by Ron Ptolemy. This spreadsheet applies Ptolemy WUP HSI curves, February 12, Golder Associates Ltd. SITE 003 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus UTM: Date: 12/09/2008 Watershed code: Mainstem/side-channel: m/s Site number: 003 Meter: Digital Velocity Transect #: 1 Metered at*: 40% dfb Transect width: 5.5 m Hydraulic type: rapid Width:Mean Depth Ratio: Site length: 17.0 m Site width: 6.5 m Transect type: EF site Site area**: m 2 Stream width: 40 m Discharge: m 3 *s -1 Number of stations: 14 NOTES: * dfb = depth from bottom. ** at unsymmetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. SITE WEIGHTED MEANS ADJUSTED USABLE AREAS Mean Depth: 0.2 m Usable Width for Fry: 2.4 m Mean Velocity: 0.5 m*s -1 %Transect Usable by Fry 43.5 % Cross-sectional area : 1.2 m 2 Usable Area for Fry 48.1 m 2 Mean Probability (Fry): 43.5 % Usable Width Parr: 3.6 m Mean Probability (Parr): 64.8 % %Transect Usable by Parr 64.8 % Usable Area for Parr 71.6 m 2 This spread sheet is designed for depth/velocity transect data collected within a closed electrofishing site. DEPTH/ VELOCITY DATA FOR WEIGHTED USABLE AREA (WUA) CALCULATIONS TRANSECT DATA Cell Cell Cell Cell Usable Cell Usable Cell Cell Station Depth Velocity Width Mean Mean Prob. Width Prob. Width Area Discharge (m) (m) (m/s) Depth Velocity Fry Fry Parr Parr (m) (m) (m*s -1 ) (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 *s -1 ) \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 3 Golder Associates Page 2 of 2

44 17/03/2009 APPENDIX I - SITE 3 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, Cheakamus River Rainbow Trout Survey, September 2008 FISH CAPTURE SUMMARY FORM SITE 003 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus Start: Finish: Volts: Setting: Seconds: Site number: 003 Pass H5 751 Site length: 17.0 m Pass H5 593 Site width: 6.5 m Pass H5 442 Site area: m 2 Species Age Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Total Fish Mean Weight (g) Mn Length (mm) Population Estimate Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100m 2 O. mykiss O. mykiss CV Pop'n Estimate Population Estimate SE \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 3 Golder Associates Page 3 of 3

45 17/03/2009 APPENDIX I - SITE 4 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, ELECTROFISHING SITE DESCRIPTION FORM SITE 004 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus COVER: Watershed code: log: 0 % boulder: 20 % Site number: 004 instream vegetation: 0 % Date: 11/09/2008 overstream vegetation: 0 % Surveyed by: RH/AL/AL/MS cutbank: 0 % UTM: 10U SUBSTRATE: Hydraulic type: riffle and pool fines: 15 % Mainstem/sidechannel (m/s,s/c): m/s small gravel: 15 % Field gradient: - % large gravel: 20 % Stream width: 35.0 m cobble: 30 % Channel width: 65.0 m boulder: 20 % Mean depth: 0.35 m bedrock: 0 % Maximum depth: 0.80 m Mean velocity: 0.24 m*s -1 Compaction: low Maximum velocity: 1.00 m*s -1 Sand (% of area): - % d90: 1.15 m Turbidity: Med dmax: 0.35 m Temperature ( Site Stelength: 15.0 m Stream Stage: Low Site width: 10.5 m Conductivity: - S*cm -1 Site area*: m 2 * At non-symetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 4 Golder Associates Page 1 of 3

46 17/03/2009 APPENDIX I - SITE 4 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, DEPTH/VELOCITY TRANSECT DATA ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET (CALCULATES W.U.A. & DISCHARGE) Spreadsheet modified by Heather Lamson, Golder Associates Limited, from one provided by Ron Ptolemy. This spreadsheet applies Ptolemy WUP HSI curves, February 12, Golder Associates Limited SITE 004 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus UTM: 10U Date: 11/09/2008 Watershed code: Mainstem/side-channel: m/s Site number: 004 Meter: Digital Velocity Meter Transect #: 1 Metered at*: 40% dfb Transect width: 10.5 m Hydraulic type: riffle and pool Width:Mean Depth Ratio: Site length: 15.0 m Site width: 10.5 m Transect type: EF site Site area**: m 2 Stream width: 65 m Discharge: m 3 *s -1 Number of stations: 20 NOTES: * dfb = depth from bottom. ** at unsymmetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. SITE WEIGHTED MEANS ADJUSTED USABLE AREAS Mean Depth: 0.3 m Usable Width for Fry: 2.3 m Mean Velocity: 0.2 m*s -1 %Transect Usable by Fry 21.7 % Cross-sectional area : 3.5 m 2 Usable Area for Fry 34.2 m 2 Mean Probability (Fry): 21.7 % Usable Width Parr: 4.6 m Mean Probability (Parr): 44.0 % %Transect Usable by Parr 44.0 % Usable Area for Parr 69.3 m 2 This spread sheet is designed for depth/velocity transect data collected within a closed electrofishing site. DEPTH/ VELOCITY DATA FOR WEIGHTED USABLE AREA (WUA) CALCULATIONS TRANSECT DATA Cell Cell Cell Cell Usable Cell Usable Cell Cell Station Depth Velocity Width Mean Mean Prob. Width Prob. Width Area Discharge (m) (m) (m/s) Depth Velocity Fry Fry Parr Parr (m) (m) (m*s -1 ) (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 *s -1 ) \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 4 Golder Associates Page 2 of 3

47 17/03/2009 APPENDIX I - SITE 4 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, Cheakamus River Rainbow Trout Survey, September 2008 FISH CAPTURE SUMMARY FORM Golder Associates Limited SITE 004 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus Start: Finish: Volts: Setting: Seconds: Site number: 004 Pass H5 835 Site length: 15.0 m Pass H5 895 Site width: 10.5 m Pass H5 600 Site area: m 2 Pass H5 610 Species Age Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Pass 4 Total Fish Mean Weight (g) Mn Length (mm) Population Estimate Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100 2 CV Pop'n Estimate Population Estimate SE O. mykiss Gasterosteus aculeatus \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 4 Golder Associates Page 3 of 3

48 17/03/2009 APPENDIX I - SITE 5 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, ELECTROFISHING SITE DESCRIPTION FORM SITE 005 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus COVER: Watershed code: log: 20 % boulder: 40 % Site number: 005 instream vegetation: 0 % Date: 26/09/2008 overstream vegetation: 20 % Surveyed by: AL/AL/RH cutbank: 20 % UTM: SUBSTRATE: Hydraulic type: riffle fines: 20 % Mainstem/sidechannel (m/s,s/c): m/s small gravel: 5 % Field gradient: - % large gravel: 5 % Stream width: 40.0 m cobble: 40 % Channel width: 50.0 m boulder: 30 % Mean depth: 0.50 m bedrock: 0 % Maximum depth: 0.90 m Mean velocity: 0.12 m*s -1 Compaction: - Maximum velocity: 0.66 m*s -1 Sand (% of area): - % d90: 0.90 m Turbidity: low-med dmax: 0.35 m Temperature ( time): 0900 Site length: 15.0 m Stream Stage: Low Site width: 10.0 m Conductivity: 47 S*cm -1 Site area*: m 2 * At non-symetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 5 Golder Associates Page 1 of 3

49 17/03/2009 APPENDIX I - SITE 5 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, DEPTH/VELOCITY TRANSECT DATA ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET (CALCULATES W.U.A. & DISCHARGE) Spreadsheet modified by Robert Harrison, Golder Associates Limited, from one provided by Ron Ptolemy. This spreadsheet applies Ptolemy WUP HSI curves, February 12, Golder Associates Limited SITE 005 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus UTM: Date: 26/09/2008 Watershed code: Mainstem/side-channel: m/s Site number: 005 Meter: Digital Velocity Meter Transect #: 1 Metered at*: 40% dfb Transect width: 10.0 m Hydraulic type: riffle Width:Mean Depth Ratio: Site length: 15.0 m Site width: 10.0 m Transect type: EF site Site area**: m 2 Stream width: 50 m Discharge: m 3 *s -1 Number of stations: 21 NOTES: * dfb = depth from bottom. ** at unsymmetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. SITE WEIGHTED MEANS ADJUSTED USABLE AREAS Mean Depth: 0.1 m Usable Width for Fry: 4.1 m Mean Velocity: 0.2 m*s -1 %Transect Usable by Fry 41.2 % Cross-sectional area : 1.4 m 2 Usable Area for Fry 61.8 m 2 Mean Probability (Fry): 41.2 % Usable Width Parr: 2.4 m Mean Probability (Parr): 24.3 % %Transect Usable by Parr 24.3 % Usable Area for Parr 36.5 m 2 This spread sheet is designed for depth/velocity transect data collected within a closed electrofishing site. DEPTH/ VELOCITY DATA FOR WEIGHTED USABLE AREA (WUA) CALCULATIONS TRANSECT DATA Cell Cell Cell Cell Usable Cell Usable Cell Cell Station Depth Velocity Width Mean Mean Prob. Width Prob. Width Area Discharge (m) (m) (m/s) Depth Velocity Fry Fry Parr Parr (m) (m) (m*s -1 ) (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 *s -1 ) \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 5 Golder Associates Page 2 of 3

50 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 5 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, Cheakamus River Rainbow Trout Survey, September 2008 FISH CAPTURE SUMMARY FORM Golder Associates Limited SITE 005 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus Start: Finish: Volts: Setting: Seconds: Site number: 005 Pass H5 922 Site length: 15.0 m Pass H5 783 Site width: 10.0 m Pass H5 673 Site area: m 2 Pass H5 597 Species Age Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Pass 4 Total Fish Mean Weight (g) Mn Length (mm) Population Estimate Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100 2 CV Pop'n Estimate Population Estimate SE O. mykiss O. mykiss O. mykiss Cottus Gasterosteus aculeatus Salvelinus malma \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 5 Golder Associates Page 3 of 3

51 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 6 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, ELECTROFISHING SITE DESCRIPTION FORM SITE 006 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus COVER: Watershed code: log: 1 % boulder: 99 % Site number: 006 instream vegetation: 0 % Date: 26/09/2008 overstream vegetation: 0 % Surveyed by: AL/AL/RH cutbank: 0 % UTM: SUBSTRATE: Hydraulic type: run fines: 0 % Mainstem/sidechannel (m/s,s/c): m/s small gravel: 5 % Field gradient: - % large gravel: 10 % Stream width: 25.0 m cobble: 45 % Channel width: 50.0 m boulder: 40 % Mean depth: 0.40 m bedrock: 0 % Maximum depth: 1.00 m Mean velocity: 0.09 m*s -1 Compaction: mod Maximum velocity: 0.38 m*s -1 Sand (% of area): - % d90: 0.80 m Turbidity: mod dmax: 0.01 m Temperature ( time): 1545 Site length: 21.0 m Stream Stage: Low Site width: 7.0 m Conductivity: 32 S*cm -1 Site area*: m 2 * At non-symetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 6 Golder Associates Page 1 of 3

52 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 6 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, DEPTH/VELOCITY TRANSECT DATA ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET (CALCULATES W.U.A. & DISCHARGE) Spreadsheet modified by Robert Harrison, Golder Associates Limited, from one provided by Ron Ptolemy. This spreadsheet applies Ptolemy WUP HSI curves, February 12, Golder Associates Ltd. SITE 006 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus UTM: Date: 26/09/2008 Watershed code: Mainstem/side-channel: m/s Site number: 006 Meter: Digital Velocity Meter Transect #: 1 Metered at*: 40% dfb Transect width: 7.0 m Hydraulic type: run Width:Mean Depth Ratio: Site length: 21.0 m Site width: 7.0 m Transect type: EF site Site area**: m 2 Stream width: 50 m Discharge: m 3 *s -1 Number of stations: 16 NOTES: * dfb = depth from bottom. ** at unsymmetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. SITE WEIGHTED MEANS ADJUSTED USABLE AREAS Mean Depth: 0.3 m Usable Width for Fry: 2.5 m Mean Velocity: 0.2 m*s -1 %Transect Usable by Fry 35.1 % Cross-sectional area : 2.0 m 2 Usable Area for Fry 51.5 m 2 Mean Probability (Fry): 35.1 % Usable Width Parr: 2.5 m Mean Probability (Parr): 35.3 % %Transect Usable by Parr 35.3 % Usable Area for Parr 51.8 m 2 This spread sheet is designed for depth/velocity transect data collected within a closed electrofishing site. DEPTH/ VELOCITY DATA FOR WEIGHTED USABLE AREA (WUA) CALCULATIONS TRANSECT DATA Cell Cell Cell Cell Usable Cell Usable Cell Cell Station Depth Velocity Width Mean Mean Prob. Width Prob. Width Area Discharge (m) (m) (m/s) Depth Velocity Fry Fry Parr Parr (m) (m) (m*s -1 ) (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 *s -1 ) \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 6 Golder Associates Page 2 of 2

53 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 6 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, Cheakamus River Rainbow Trout Survey, September 2008 FISH CAPTURE SUMMARY FORM Golder Associates Limited SITE 006 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus Start: Finish: Volts: Setting: Seconds: Site number: 006 Pass H5 779 Site length: 21.0 m Pass H5 687 Site width: 7.0 m Pass H5 565 Site area: m 2 Pass H5 528 Species Age Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Pass 4 Total Fish Mean Weight (g) Mn Length (mm) Population Estimate Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100 2 CV Pop'n Estimate Population Estimate SE O. mykiss O. mykiss O. mykiss Cottus Gasterosteus aculeatus \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 6 Golder Associates Page 3 of 3

54 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 7 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, ELECTROFISHING SITE DESCRIPTION FORM SITE 007 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus COVER: Watershed code: log: 0 % boulder: 95 % Site number: 007 instream vegetation: 0 % Date: 27/09/2008 overstream vegetation: 5 % Surveyed by: AL/AL/RH cutbank: 0 % UTM: SUBSTRATE: Hydraulic type: riffle fines: 5 % Mainstem/sidechannel (m/s,s/c): m/s small gravel: 10 % Field gradient: - % large gravel: 10 % Stream width: 45.0 m cobble: 50 % Channel width: 55.0 m boulder: 25 % Mean depth: 0.30 m bedrock: 0 % Maximum depth: 0.50 m Mean velocity: 0.21 m*s -1 Compaction: mod Maximum velocity: 0.53 m*s -1 Sand (% of area): - % d90: m Turbidity: low dmax: m Temperature ( time): 1050 Site length: 19.6 m Stream Stage: low Site width: 10.0 m Conductivity: 31 S*cm -1 Site area*: m 2 * At non-symetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix II\ Golder Associates Page 1 of 3 Habitat Site 7

55 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 7 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, DEPTH/VELOCITY TRANSECT DATA ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET (CALCULATES W.U.A. & DISCHARGE) Spreadsheet modified by Robert Harrison, Golder Associates Limited, from one provided by Ron Ptolemy. This spreadsheet applies Ptolemy WUP HSI curves, February 12, Golder Associates Limited SITE 007 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus UTM: Date: 27/09/2008 Watershed code: Mainstem/side-channel: m/s Site number: 007 Meter: Digital Velocity Meter Transect #: 1 Metered at*: 40% dfb Transect width: 10.0 m Hydraulic type: riffle Width:Mean Depth Ratio: Site length: 19.6 m Site width: 10.0 m Transect type: EF site Site area**: m 2 Stream width: 55 m Discharge: m 3 *s -1 Number of stations: 22 NOTES: * dfb = depth from bottom. ** at unsymmetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. SITE WEIGHTED MEANS ADJUSTED USABLE AREAS Mean Depth: 0.2 m Usable Width for Fry: 4.3 m Mean Velocity: 0.3 m*s -1 %Transect Usable by Fry 43.2 % Cross-sectional area : 2.2 m 2 Usable Area for Fry 84.6 m 2 Mean Probability (Fry): 43.2 % Usable Width Parr: 6.0 m Mean Probability (Parr): 60.3 % %Transect Usable by Parr 60.3 % Usable Area for Parr m 2 This spread sheet is designed for depth/velocity transect data collected within a closed electrofishing site. DEPTH/ VELOCITY DATA FOR WEIGHTED USABLE AREA (WUA) CALCULATIONS TRANSECT DATA Cell Cell Cell Cell Usable Cell Usable Cell Cell Station Depth Velocity Width Mean Mean Prob. Width Prob. Width Area Discharge (m) (m) (m/s) Depth Velocity Fry Fry Parr Parr (m) (m) (m*s -1 ) (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 *s -1 ) \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix II\ Golder Associates Page 2 of 3 Habitat Site 7

56 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 7 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, Cheakamus River Rainbow Trout Survey, September 2008 FISH CAPTURE SUMMARY FORM Golder Associates Ltd. SITE 007 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus Start: Finish: Volts: Setting: Seconds: Site number: 007 Pass H5 823 Site length: 19.6 m Pass H5 639 Site width: 10.0 m Pass H5 592 Site area: m 2 Pass H5 445 Species Age Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Total Fish Mean Weight (g) Mn Length Population (mm) Estimate Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted CV Pop'n Population Fish/100m 2 Estimate Estimate SE O. mykiss O. mykiss Cottus \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix II\ Habitat Site 7 Golder Associates Page 3 of 3

57 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 8 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, ELECTROFISHING SITE DESCRIPTION FORM SITE 008 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus COVER: Watershed code: log: 0 % boulder: 100 % Site number: 008 instream vegetation: 0 % Date: 30/09/2008 overstream vegetation: 0 % Surveyed by: AL/RH/MS cutbank: 0 % UTM: SUBSTRATE: Hydraulic type: riffle fines: 15 % Mainstem/sidechannel (m/s,s/c): m/s small gravel: 10 % Field gradient: - % large gravel: 15 % Stream width: 35.0 m cobble: 25 % Channel width: 40.0 m boulder: 35 % Mean depth: 0.30 m bedrock: 0 % Maximum depth: 0.70 m Mean velocity: 0.07 m*s -1 Compaction: high Maximum velocity: 1.13 m*s -1 Sand (% of area): - % d90: 1.00 m Turbidity: Med dmax: 1.50 m Temperature ( time): 1300 Site length: 12x14.5x12 m Stream Stage: Low Site width: triangle m Conductivity: 38 S*cm -1 Site area*: 92.5 m 2 * At non-symetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 8 Golder Associates Page 1 of 3

58 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 8 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, DEPTH/VELOCITY TRANSECT DATA ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET (CALCULATES W.U.A. & DISCHARGE) Spreadsheet modified by Robert Harrison, Golder Associates Limited, from one provided by Ron Ptolemy. This spreadsheet applies Ptolemy WUP HSI curves, February 12, Golder Associates Limited SITE 008 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus UTM: Date: 30/09/2008 Watershed code: Mainstem/side-channel: m/s Site number: 008 Meter: Digital Velocity Meter Transect #: 1 Metered at*: 40% dfb Transect width: 7.0 m Hydraulic type: riffle Width:Mean Depth Ratio: Site length: 12x14.5x12 m Site width: triangle m Transect type: EF site Site area**: 92.5 m 2 Stream width: 40 m Discharge: m 3 *s -1 Number of stations: 27 NOTES: * dfb = depth from bottom. ** at unsymmetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. SITE WEIGHTED MEANS ADJUSTED USABLE AREAS Mean Depth: 0.6 m Usable Width for Fry: 2.6 m Mean Velocity: 0.2 m*s -1 %Transect Usable by Fry 36.5 % Cross-sectional area : 3.9 m 2 Usable Area for Fry 33.8 m 2 Mean Probability (Fry): 36.5 % Usable Width Parr: 1.2 m Mean Probability (Parr): 16.9 % %Transect Usable by Parr 16.9 % Usable Area for Parr 15.6 m 2 This spread sheet is designed for depth/velocity transect data collected within a closed electrofishing site. DEPTH/ VELOCITY DATA FOR WEIGHTED USABLE AREA (WUA) CALCULATIONS TRANSECT DATA Cell Cell Cell Cell Usable Cell Usable Cell Cell Station Depth Velocity Width Mean Mean Prob. Width Prob. Width Area Discharge (m) (m) (m/s) Depth Velocity Fry Fry Parr Parr (m) (m) (m*s -1 ) (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 *s -1 ) \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 8 Golder Associates Page 2 of 2

59 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 8 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, Cheakamus River Rainbow Trout Survey, September 2008 FISH CAPTURE SUMMARY FORM Golder Associates Limited SITE 008 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus Start: Finish: Volts: Setting: Seconds: Site number: 008 Pass H5 558 Site length: 12x14.5x12 m Pass H5 542 Site width: triangle m Pass H5 517 Site area: 92.5 m 2 Pass H5 414 Species Age Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Pass 4 Total Fish Mean Weight (g) Mn Length (mm) Population Estimate Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100 2 CV Pop'n Estimate Population Estimate SE O. mykiss O. mykiss Gasterosteus aculeatus Salvelinus malma \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 8 Golder Associates Page 3 of 3

60 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 9 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, ELECTROFISHING SITE DESCRIPTION FORM SITE 009 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus COVER: Watershed code: log: 2 % boulder: 95 % Site number: 009 instream vegetation: 0 % Date: 20/09/2008 overstream vegetation: 3 % Surveyed by: AL/RH/MS cutbank: 0 % UTM: SUBSTRATE: Hydraulic type: run fines: 5 % Mainstem/sidechannel (m/s,s/c): m/s small gravel: 5 % Field gradient: - % large gravel: 5 % Stream width: 40.0 m cobble: 10 % Channel width: 40.0 m boulder: 75 % Mean depth: 0.45 m bedrock: 0 % Maximum depth: 0.70 m Mean velocity: 0.47 m*s -1 Compaction: mod Maximum velocity: 0.81 m*s -1 Sand (% of area): - % d90: 0.70 m Turbidity: mod dmax: 1.20 m Temperature ( time): 1600 Site length: 18.5 m Stream Stage: Low Site width: 5.0 m Conductivity: 41 S*cm -1 Site area*: 92.5 m 2 * At non-symetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 9 Golder Associates Page 1 of 3

61 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 9 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, DEPTH/VELOCITY TRANSECT DATA ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET (CALCULATES W.U.A. & DISCHARGE) Spreadsheet modified by Robert Harrison, Golder Associates Limited, from one provided by Ron Ptolemy. This spreadsheet applies Ptolemy WUP HSI curves, February 12, Golder Associates Limited SITE 009 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus UTM: Date: 20/09/2008 Watershed code: Mainstem/side-channel: m/s Site number: 009 Meter: Digital Velocity Meter Transect #: 1 Metered at*: 40% dfb Transect width: 7.0 m Hydraulic type: run Width:Mean Depth Ratio: Site length: 18.5 m Site width: 5.0 m Transect type: EF site Site area**: 92.5 m 2 Stream width: 40 m Discharge: m 3 *s -1 Number of stations: 11 NOTES: * dfb = depth from bottom. ** at unsymmetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. SITE WEIGHTED MEANS ADJUSTED USABLE AREAS Mean Depth: 0.4 m Usable Width for Fry: 0.9 m Mean Velocity: 0.5 m*s -1 %Transect Usable by Fry 12.6 % Cross-sectional area : 2.6 m 2 Usable Area for Fry 11.7 m 2 Mean Probability (Fry): 12.6 % Usable Width Parr: 4.4 m Mean Probability (Parr): 62.6 % %Transect Usable by Parr 62.6 % Usable Area for Parr 57.9 m 2 This spread sheet is designed for depth/velocity transect data collected within a closed electrofishing site. DEPTH/ VELOCITY DATA FOR WEIGHTED USABLE AREA (WUA) CALCULATIONS TRANSECT DATA Cell Cell Cell Cell Usable Cell Usable Cell Cell Station Depth Velocity Width Mean Mean Prob. Width Prob. Width Area Discharge (m) (m) (m/s) Depth Velocity Fry Fry Parr Parr (m) (m) (m*s -1 ) (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 *s -1 ) \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 9 Golder Assoicates Page 2 of 3

62 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 9 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, Cheakamus River Rainbow Trout Survey, September 2008 FISH CAPTURE SUMMARY FORM Golder Associates Limited SITE 009 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus Start: Finish: Volts: Setting: Seconds: Site number: 009 Pass H5 323 Site length: 18.5 m Pass H5 496 Site width: 5.0 m Pass H5 520 Site area: 92.5 m 2 Species Age Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Total Fish Mean Weight (g) Mn Length (mm) Population Estimate Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100m 2 CV Pop'n Estimate Population Estimate SE O. mykiss O. mykiss Gasterosteus aculeatus Salvelinus malma \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 9 Golder Associates Page 3 of 3

63 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 10 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, ELECTROFISHING SITE DESCRIPTION FORM SITE 010 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus COVER: Watershed code: log: 5 % boulder: 95 % Site number: 010 instream vegetation: 0 % Date: 25/09/2008 overstream vegetation: 0 % Surveyed by: AL/AL/RH cutbank: 0 % UTM: SUBSTRATE: Hydraulic type: riffle/rapid fines: 0 % Mainstem/sidechannel (m/s,s/c): m/s small gravel: 1 % Field gradient: - % large gravel: 1 % Stream width: 40.0 m cobble: 3 % Channel width: 65.0 m boulder: 95 % Mean depth: 0.65 m bedrock: 0 % Maximum depth: 1.20 m Mean velocity: 0.20 m*s -1 Compaction: Med Maximum velocity: 0.58 m*s -1 Sand (% of area): 0 % d90: 1.60 m Turbidity: Med dmax: 2.90 m Temperature ( time): 1030 Site length: 18.5 m Stream Stage: Low Site width: 10.0 m Conductivity: 37 S*cm -1 Site area*: m 2 * At non-symetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 10 Golder Associates Page 1 of 3

64 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 10 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, DEPTH/VELOCITY TRANSECT DATA ANALYSIS SPREADSHEET (CALCULATES W.U.A. & DISCHARGE) Spreadsheet modified by Robert Harrison, Golder Associates Limited, from one provided by Ron Ptolemy. This spreadsheet applies Ptolemy WUP HSI curves, February 12, Golder Associates Limited SITE 010 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus UTM: Date: 25/09/2008 Watershed code: Mainstem/side-channel: m/s Site number: 010 Meter: Digital Velocity Meter Transect #: 1 Metered at*: 40% dfb Transect width: 7.0 m Hydraulic type: riffle/rapid Width:Mean Depth Ratio: Site length: 18.5 m Site width: 10.0 m Transect type: EF site Site area**: m 2 Stream width: 65 m Discharge: m 3 *s -1 Number of stations: 21 NOTES: * dfb = depth from bottom. ** at unsymmetrical sites, area is calculated from field measurements, not as site length * site width. SITE WEIGHTED MEANS ADJUSTED USABLE AREAS Mean Depth: 0.3 m Usable Width for Fry: 3.5 m Mean Velocity: 0.2 m*s -1 %Transect Usable by Fry 50.5 % Cross-sectional area : 2.2 m 2 Usable Area for Fry 93.4 m 2 Mean Probability (Fry): 50.5 % Usable Width Parr: 4.0 m Mean Probability (Parr): 57.1 % %Transect Usable by Parr 57.1 % Usable Area for Parr m 2 This spread sheet is designed for depth/velocity transect data collected within a closed electrofishing site. DEPTH/ VELOCITY DATA FOR WEIGHTED USABLE AREA (WUA) CALCULATIONS TRANSECT DATA Cell Cell Cell Cell Usable Cell Usable Cell Cell Station Depth Velocity Width Mean Mean Prob. Width Prob. Width Area Discharge (m) (m) (m/s) Depth Velocity Fry Fry Parr Parr (m) (m) (m*s -1 ) (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 *s -1 ) \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 10 Golder Associates Page 2 of 2

65 17/03/2009 APPENDIX II - SITE 10 TROUT ABUNDANCE MONITOR, CHEAKAMUS RIVER, Cheakamus River Rainbow Trout Survey, September 2008 FISH CAPTURE SUMMARY FORM Golder Associates Limited SITE 010 Cheakamus Stream: Cheakamus Start: Finish: Volts: Setting: Seconds: Site number: 010 Pass H Site length: 18.5 m Pass H5 914 Site width: 10.0 m Pass H5 686 Site area: m 2 Pass H5 667 Species Age Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 3 Pass 4 Total Fish Mean Weight (g) Mn Length (mm) Population Estimate Fish/100m 2 Probability of Use Adjusted Fish/100 2 CV Pop'n Estimate Population Estimate SE O. mykiss O. mykiss O. mykiss S. fontinalis \\Bur1-s-filesrv2\final\2008\1422\ \REP 0317_09 Cheakamus Trout Abundance_FINAL\Appendices\Appendix B\ Habitat Site 10 Golder Associates Page 3 of 3

66 Golder Associates Ltd Still Creek Drive Burnaby, British Columbia, V5C 6C6 Canada T: +1 (604)