2010 Fish Passage Culvert Inspection (FPCI) Fish Presence/Absence Mapping Progress Report (Phases 1 through 3)

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "2010 Fish Passage Culvert Inspection (FPCI) Fish Presence/Absence Mapping Progress Report (Phases 1 through 3)"

Meryl Brooks
5 years ago
Views:

2010 Fish Passage Culvert Inspection (FPCI) Fish Presence/Absence Mapping Progress Report (Phases 1 through 3) Prepared for: Kamloops Timber Supply Area 11 (TSA 11) Contributors: Report prepared by:

1 2010 Fish Passage Culvert Inspection (FPCI) Fish Presence/Absence Mapping Progress Report (Phases 1 through 3) Prepared for: Kamloops Timber Supply Area 11 (TSA 11) Contributors: Report prepared by: Jenine Mylymok and Michele Trumbley, RPBio Guidelines for Digital Capture: Tannis Nelson, Forsite Consultants Ltd. Reviewed and professionally sealed by: Michele Trumbley, RPBio Submission dates: Updated Final: February 28, 2010 TRUMBLEY ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING LIMITED 4574 Larkin X Road Armstrong, B.C. V0E 1B6 Ph: (250) INFO@TRUMBLEYENVIRONMENTAL.CA

2 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction Methods Questions and Answers... 7 Lake-headed streams...7 Wetlands occurring upstream of a confirmed barrier to fish movement Appendix A: Guidelines for Digital Capture... 8 Attachment 1: s i

3 1.0 Introduction The fish presence/absence maps and associated database are intended for use as a planning tool in the identification of potential sites to complete fish passage culvert inspections (FPCIs). This fish presence/absence mapping project has been funded under the Forest Investment Account. For the fiscal year 2010, the Lower North Thompson (LNTH) River Watershed hardcopy mapsheets were digitized and quality assured. For fiscal year 2008/2009, a total of 50 full priority mapsheets were selected by licensees to undertake fish presence/absence mapping. Additional information was also added to 15 mapsheets that were previously mapped in phases 1 and 2. The total number of mapsheets completed in fiscal year 2008/2009 was 65 (refer to Figure 1). Mapsheets were selected using the Provincial Ministry of Environment Fisheries Value polygon ranking for watershed sub-basins and watershed groups 1. For reference purposes only, the completion of the 65 mapsheets in fiscal year 2008/2009, will be regarded as Phase 3 of a multi-phase project for the Kamloops TSA. Note: The Lower North Thompson River Watershed hardcopy mapsheets were quality assured, but not digitized in For fiscal year 2007/2008, a total of 10 priority mapsheets, encompassing TFL #18, were selected by Canadian Forest Products Ltd., Vavenby Division, to undertake fish presence/absence mapping (refer to Figure 1). For reference purposes only, the completion of the 10 mapsheets in fiscal year 2007/2008, will be regarded as Phase 2 of a multi-phase project for the Kamloops TSA. For fiscal year 2006/2007, a total of 48 priority mapsheets were selected by licensees to undertake fish presence/absence mapping (refer to Figure 1). For reference purposes only, the completion of the 48 mapsheets in fiscal year 2006/2007, will be regarded as Phase 1 of a multi-phase project for the Kamloops TSA. The fish presence/absence mapping project area, which is located in the Kamloops and Headwaters Forest Districts, includes the entire Kamloops Timber Supply Area 11 (TSA 11), (including TFL 18 and TFL 35). Tree Farm License 18 (TFL 18) was completed during the fiscal year 2007/2008. Tree Farm License 35 (TFL 35) was completed during fiscal year 2008/2009, as it lies entirely within the Lower North Thompson Watershed. The original version of this report, 2006/2007 Fish Presence/Absence Mapping Progress Report, was completed and submitted by Snowy River Resources Ltd. on December 6, Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. updated the content of the original report on March 31, 2009 with permission from Snowy River Resources Ltd. The content of the report was again updated by Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. on February 28, All updated content (including digital and hardcopy mapsheets and associated database) as of February 28, 2010, is the responsibility of Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd

4 2.0 Methods Phase 3 of the FPCI fish presence/absence mapping project was completed in two parts. The first part commenced in January 2009 and was completed on April 7, The second part commenced in January 2010 and was completed on February 28, Phase 2 (TFL #18) of the FPCI fish presence/absence mapping project commenced in January 2008 and was completed on March 31, 2008 (original maps completed by Snowy River Resources Ltd). A progress report was not completed for Phase 2 in 2007/2008. Phase 1 of the FPCI fish presence/absence mapping project commenced in January 2007 and was completed on October 22, 2007 (original maps completed by Snowy River Resources Ltd). Phases 1 and 2: In general accordance to the FPCI Procedure 2, Snowy River Resources Ltd. Consulting Ltd. compiled and verified known fish presence, absence, distribution and fish sampling data from all available sources. Phase 3: In general accordance to the Fish Protocol for Culverted Sites 3, Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. compiled known fish presence, absence, distribution and fish sampling data from all available sources to develop a set of working level fish presence/absence information maps. The fish presence/absence information maps are intended to overlay road network maps available from the ILMB, BC Ministry of Forests and/or individual licensees. The fish presence/absence information contained on the digital and hardcopy mapsheets and in the associated database has been verified by Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. and is current to February 28, The fish presence, absence, distribution and fish sampling data sources 4 included, but were not limited to: Fish Inventory Summary System; Habitat Wizard; Fish presence/absence assessments completed by consultants for the purposes of determining stream classifications (also known as operational inventories); Fish Habitat Assessment (RISC Standard); Reconnaissance 1:20,000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventories (RISC Standard); Extensive communication with Steve Maricle, Fish Technician, Ministry of Environment, regarding the fish bearing status of small lakes; Fish distribution reports commissioned by the Ministry of Environment or the Department of Fisheries and Oceans; and, Extensive communication with various consultants and Biologists. The Fish Passage Protocol for Culverted sites and the FPCI Procedure enables some flexibility for mapping fish presence/absence data. Table 1 shows how protocols for mapping fish presence/absence data by Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. varied throughout the three phases All reports that were available in digital form have been included in the attached CD. Reports contained on the CD are referenced as Disk in the Source_location column, in the Kamloops TSA Fish Presence/Absence Database. 2

Figure 1: Fish Presence/Absence Maps Digitized & Quality Assured as of February 28, 2010 (N = 105 Mapsheets 5 ) LEGEND - The fish information completed on each mapsheet includes only that information

5 Figure 1: Fish Presence/Absence Maps Digitized & Quality Assured as of February 28, 2010 (N = 105 Mapsheets 5 ) LEGEND - The fish information completed on each mapsheet includes only that information pertaining to the priority watershed outlined (no other watersheds were completed within each mapsheet). Phase 3 (2008/2009): Adams River Watershed BC Timber Sales (BCTS) Gilbert Smith Forest Products Ltd. (GSFP) International Forest Products Ltd. (Interfor) Stella Jones Inc., prev. Bell Pole (SJ) L. North Thompson Watershed BCTS Canadian Forest Products Ltd. (Canfor) Tolko Industries Ltd. (Tolko) Weyerhaeuser Company Ltd. (Weyer) N Phase 2 (2007/2008): TFL #18 Canfor 83D D.006 Phase 1 (2006/2007): Barriere River Watershed Tolko Deadman River Watershed BCTS 82M M M M M.093 Raft River Watershed Canfor 92P.099 Tranquille River Watershed Weyer 82M M.086 U. Adams River Watershed GSFP 82M M M.083 NOTE: 92P P P A solid line indicates that all fish information within 82M M M P M M.074 the priority watershed is completed on the mapsheet. - A dotted line indicates that no fish information was 92P P.078 available on the mapsheet within the priority watershed. 82M M M M M P P P M M M M M M P P P M M M P M M M P P M M M M M P P P M M M M.022 Kamloops TSA Boundary 92P P P M M P P M P P P M M M P P P P P L L L I I I I I I L L I I L I I I I I I I I I L The total number of mapsheets (N) includes mapsheets with no available digitized information and partial mapsheets. 3

6 Using the above noted references, Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. hand mapped, verified fish presence/absence data onto hardcopy mapsheets. An excel database was developed and all relevant fish presence, absence, distribution and fish sampling data was entered into the database. Data entered into the database has been assigned a point number reference (P#) or line number reference (L#), which spatially corresponds to P# (points) and L# (arcs) on the hardcopy and digital map (refer to Table 2 for an explanation of mapping protocols used for this project). Forsite Consultants Ltd. completed the digital mapping for phases 1 and 3 of this project using the guidelines for digital capture (refer to Appendix 1). Forsite Consultants Ltd. provided digital mapsheets in Adobe PDF format to Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. A geodatabase, containing the input excel data is linked to the two spatial datasets. All digital deliverables are located on the disk attached to the back of this report. Using the above-mentioned guidelines for digital capture, phase 2 digital mapsheets were completed by John Rogers, GIS, at Canadian Forest Products Ltd. Quality Assurance Statement: All source fish data, as presented on the maps and database (refer to Appendix 2 which includes PDF maps and the database), has been verified by Michele Trumbley, RPBio as being Forest Practices Code compliant or as meeting a standard of due diligence under the Forest and Range Practices Act. Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. is not responsible for any modifications made to these maps or the database that we have not specifically approved. 4

7 Table 1: Watercourse coding used by Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. on fish presence/absence maps Fish Passage Protocol for Culverted Sites 6 (page 7) Known Fish Presence, which is documented in FISS and other databases and/or information obtained locally from licensees. No stream coding guidelines outlined. Fish Bearing by Gradient. No stream coding guidelines outlined. Unknown Stream Status. No stream coding guidelines outlined. Parker Method FPCI Procedure 7 (page 41) Known Fish Bearing as red line, and supported by FISS data or other reliable data, and source dated in the Legend. Fish Bearing by Gradient as dashed red line which is all stream reaches from the confluence with a known fish-bearing stream up to the first gradient break >20% (>25% if bull trout present, consult with regional MELP fisheries staff if bull trout are thought to be present) or known permanent barrier. This category would also pertain to streams above such a gradient break or barrier where there is a lake or other body of water in which it is likely a resident population of fish may exist. Unknown Stream Status in blue line should be used for all other waterways unless they have been proven non-fish bearing as per current Forest Practices Code Fish stream Identification Guidebook (Province of British Columbia 1995a). Kamloops TSA Fish Presence/absence Maps Same. The Kamloops TSA fish presence/absence maps include only confirmed fish presence (solid red line) and confirmed fish-absence (solid blue line). In accordance to the FPC and FRPA, all other watercourses having a gradient less than 20% are assumed fishstreams. Trumbley deemed that the coding of these watercourses in dotted red is redundant (the same information can be obtained from the Kamloops TSA fish presence/absence maps by simply viewing watercourses having no color codes). Trumbley only coded watercourses in solid blue if fish absence was confirmed

Table 2: Mapping Protocol Mapping Protocol Example Description An L# (line number reference) is tagged to a red-coded stream segment.

A P# (point number reference) is pointing to a black marker and the upstream or downstream segment is blue-coded. Fish absence has been confirmed for the blue-coded portion of the stream.

A P# is pointing to a black marker and the upstream and/or downstream segment is red-coded. Fish presence has been confirmed for the red-coded portions of the stream.

A P# is pointing to a black marker and the upstream and downstream segments are not color-coded Fish presence/absence has not been confirmed for the stream segments, which have not been color-coded.

8 Table 2: Mapping Protocol Mapping Protocol Example Description An L# (line number reference) is tagged to a red-coded stream segment. Fish presence has been confirmed for the red-coded portion of the stream. The L# and all red-coded arcs link to a record in the Kamloops TSA Fish Presence/Absence Database. A P# (point number reference) is pointing to a black marker and the upstream or downstream segment is blue-coded. Fish absence has been confirmed for the blue-coded portion of the stream. The P# links to a record in the Kamloops TSA Fish Presence/Absence Database. All blue-coded arcs are tagged with a non fish-stream attribute. A P# is pointing to a black marker and the upstream and/or downstream segment is red-coded. Fish presence has been confirmed for the red-coded portions of the stream. The P# links to a record in the Kamloops TSA Fish Presence/Absence Database. A P# is pointing to a black marker and the upstream and downstream segments are not color-coded Fish presence/absence has not been confirmed for the stream segments, which have not been color-coded. The P#, which indicates that assessments and/or observations have been made at the site, links to a record in the Kamloops TSA Fish Presence/Absence Database. A P# is pointing to a reach break symbol which defines the upper limit of a fish-stream. Reach breaks are only applied where confirmed fish presence changes to confirmed fish absence (on the same stream). The P# links to a record in the Kamloops TSA Fish Presence/Absence Database. Reach breaks are also identified with a Y (yes) in the confirmed reach break column in the Database. A P# is located within the waterbody outline. The waterbody outline is either 1) blue-coded, 2) red-coded or, 3) is not color-coded. Red-coded Not color-coded Blue-coded 1) A blue-coded waterbody indicates confirmed fish absence; 2) A red-coded waterbody indicates confirmed fish presence; and, 3) A waterbody that is not colorcoded, indicates that fish presence/absence has not been determined. The P# links to a record in the Kamloops TSA Fish Presence/Absence Database. 6

9 3.0 Questions and Answers Lake-headed streams Q1. If a lake at the headwaters of a stream is known to support fish, are all downstream watercourses confirmed fish bearing as well? A1. Not necessarily. In some cases, biologists have found that some lakes, although fish bearing, have outlet streams with no hydrological connection to downstream fish habitat. However, in examining the available fish inventory data, Trumbley has used discretion in confirming fish presence in outlet streams flowing from fish bearing lakes. The outlet stream of a fish bearing lake is confirmed as fish bearing, when fish presence/absence sampling in the outlet stream has resulted in the capture of fish. The outlet stream of a fish bearing lake will not be color-coded, when fish presence/absence sampling in the outlet stream has not been completed, as per the example. Wetlands occurring upstream of a confirmed barrier to fish movement Q2. If a wetland exists at any point along a stream where fish absence has been confirmed (blue-coded), are these features color-coded blue, in addition to the streams? The wetland outline is on a confirmed non fish-stream, therefore, the wetland is confirmed non fish bearing. A2. No. Only lakes were coded with a solid blue line. The user should assume that all wetlands, streams and lakes are confirmed non-fish bearing if they occur upstream of a reach where fish absence has been confirmed (blue-coded). 7

10 4.0 Appendix A: Guidelines for Digital Capture Kamloops TSA Fish Mapping Project Prepared by: Tannis Nelson, Forsite Consultants Prepared on: May 23, 2007 (Revised on March 31, 2009) 1. SERVICES AND DELIVERABLES: Introduction: Using the hand-drawn data indicated on hard copy maps (1:20,000 TRIM Base) provided by Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd., Forsite will create and edit two spatial layers (poly-line and point) that will reflect and be linked to the provided excel tables of fish data. Assumptions: 1. Input materials will be provided by Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd., and consist of marked up hardcopy maps with associated excel spreadsheets of fish data. 2. Quality Assurance (QA) will be done internally (within Forsite) as well as upon submission of the pdf maps to Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. 3. Upon completion of the creation and editing of spatial data from the hardcopy maps, the maps will be returned to Trumbley Environmental Consulting Ltd. In Scope: 1. Forsite will create an ArcGIS template (mxd) consisting of the following: 1. Base data, (TRIM water and roads, district boundary). 2. Two internally derived spatial data layers: fish_stream (arc) and fish_point (point). 3. Streams themed by fish presence/absence as indicated on hardcopy maps, with legend and labeling identical to 082L.092 sample (BaseMap_082L.092_2009.pdf). 2. Forsite will edit the two layers (arc and point) to reflect the hand-drawn data on the hardcopy maps provided. 3. A geodatabase containing the input excel data will be linked to the two spatial datasets and embedded as attribute data. 4. Forsite will create a map in pdf format for each of the 50 map sheets within the project area, as per 082L.092 sample (BaseMap_082L.092_2009.pdf). Parameters within scope: 1. For double line rivers, right side of river will be digitized (at discretion of technician), and point feature will be on the right side. 2. Limited digitizing of new streams (two sections per map sheet, or to GIS technician s discretion) 3. Limited labeling of main water bodies. Out of scope: 4. Routing or network of stream layer 5. Cleaning or topological correction of stream layer 6. Analysis or derived products 8

11 Deliverables to Include: 1. Two spatial datasets in digital (geodatabase feature class) format. 2. ArcGIS mxd (ESRI map document / template) 3. A pdf map (1:20,000) created for each of the map sheets, as per 082L.092 sample (BaseMap_082L.092_2009.pdf). 4. Internal QA files and documentation (no predetermined data format) Methodology: 1. Edit the poly-line feature class, fish_streams 8, by assigning unique identification numbers that align with the hardcopy map markups. This process will consist of merging or splitting lengths of the streams (within the streams_edit dataset) into single-part sections, which are then given unique ID numbers that will link to the excel spreadsheets provided. 2. Edit the fish_points 9 dataset by heads-up digitizing points to reflect what has been indicated on hardcopy maps. The created points will be attributed with unique ID s (that are indicated on the hardcopy maps,) and will link to the excel spreadsheet provided. 3. Convert the data from the excel spreadsheet(s) into a digital format that can link to the two spatial datasets. 4. Create a pdf map for each 1:20,000 map sheet within the project area that contains symbology reflecting fish data from the linked spreadsheet and/or the hardcopy map. Process: 1. Open mxd called Digitize_Fish_Data from the following location: S:\35\29\Current\Maps\Data\ArcMapProjects 2. Click on the mapbook tab beneath the navigation tree window, and double click on the map sheet that matches your hardcopy and you will be brought to that mapsheet in layout view. 3. Change back to data view 4. Move back to the display tab in navigation window. 5. Start editing on the.shp files fish_streams or fish_points, and then follow procedures below according to what you are editing. Editing Streams: a. Setting your target editing environment to fish_streams, zoom to a stream that has been identified with red or blue marker on the hard copy map. b. Using the Select Features tool, select the entire length of stream as identified on the hardcopy map. (i) if there are multiple lines that make up the section of stream that has been colored (with a single map reference ID), merge all of them together ensuring that only the sections that you want to merge are in your selection. (ii) if there is a missing section of the stream in the dataset, extend the stream as necessary, using the hardcopy as your guide. 8 Data Source: TRIM twtr coverage obtained through a trim loan agreement. 9 Data Source: point file that was created in-house (Forsite) and contains digitized points from marked-up hard copy maps. 9

12 Update the attributes of the selected line once the above steps have been completed (if applicable. The length of stream should be unbroken and single-part before updating the attributes. c. Attribute the length of stream with (i) the stream length reference number shown on the map (L*) in the MapRefNo field and, (ii) the fish presence data (shown through the highlighting of streams) in the FishPresence field as follows: Stream Highlighted RED BLUE No highlighting Attribute FishPresence field with: Yes No Leave blank d. Once a stream section has been delineated and had the attributes updated, highlight the label with yellow on the hardcopy to facilitate QA and avoid missing any sections. Splitting streams and updating attributes: Use split tool once nodes are displayed. Attribute the length of stream with the MapRefNo (L*) shown on hardcopy map. Once the attribute update is complete, the section of stream that has been identified as either having fish presence or having no fish presence ( Yes, or No ) will change colour. If this change does not happen, the process should be checked. 10

13 Editing Points: a. Setting your target editing environment to fish_point; zoom to a stream or lake that has been given a point (identified with a P* ) b. Enable snapping to the fish_streams layer for vertex, edge and end (this will facilitate analysis that may be done between the two datasets in the future). c. Create points using heads-up digitizing from the hardcopy and update the attribute table with a. mapsheet number, b. map reference number (P* - shown on the map, in the MapRefNo field), c. If it is a lake, then fish presence (red boundary = y, no red boundary = n ) d. Feature type: i. Lake = L ii. Reach Break = RB_NS, or RB_EW, or RB_NW or RB_NE (choose direction that would be perpendicular to stream) d. Add any comments given on the hardcopy map to the comments field in the attribute table. e. Once a point has been created and updated, highlight the point label with yellow on the hardcopy to facilitate the QA process and avoid missing any points. Updating Lake Fish Presence/Absence Status: Lake symbology is based on a selection by location of those lakes that contain points (from fish_point indicating fish absence/presence. Those lakes selected during this function will have their fish_presence_absence field updated using the data from the excel link table provided. This process will be done prior to the creation of the pdfs. 11

14 Attachment 1: s (refer to 2010 Fish Passage Culvert Inspection (FPCI) Fish Presence/Absence Mapping Progress Report (Phases 1 through 3) disk) 12

THE DIGITAL TERRAIN MAP LIBRARY: AN EXPLORATIONIST S RESOURCE

THE DIGITAL TERRAIN MAP LIBRARY: AN EXPLORATIONIST S RESOURCE By I.C.L. Webster, P.J. Desjardins and W.E. Kilby KEYWORDS: digital terrain maps, digital terrain stability maps, surficial geology, GIS, raster