’s River and Stream Fisheries: North River Watershed: What was, is, and will be…

Michael Sullivan Cold place Fisheries Management Branch (low sustainable harvests)

Habitat changes (declining capacity) Many anglers (heavy pressure)

Successes: understand and communicate key issues / trade-offs Michael Sullivan Fisheries Biologist, Alberta Fish and Wildlife

Presentation to NSWA Fish Forum 25 Sept 2014 David Thompson

“I afterwards travelled much with him, and have now only to speak of him with great respect, or, I ought to say, with admiration... No living person possesses a tithe of his information respecting the Hudson’s Bay countries... Never mind his Bunyan-like face and cropped hair; he has a very powerful mind, and a singular faculty of picture-making. He can create a wilderness and people it with warring savages, or climb the with you in a snow- storm, so clearly and palpably, that only shut your eyes and you hear the crack of the rifle, or feel the snow-flakes melt on your cheeks as he talks.”

John Bigsby, 1820, The Shoe and

Lake Trout Mtn Whitefish Bull Trout

Brookies

Lake Trout Mtn Whitefish Bull Trout Bulls

No road access

Road access Sturgeon

Goldeye

“1977 was one of my best times as a fisheries biologist. I canoed right across Alberta on the , catching fish, talking to people, and getting to learn how a whole ecosystem worked.”

“Locals told me how the big runs of goldeye were almost gone and how you could only catch decent numbers below Forestburg.”

“It was really evident that things were going downhill, with big kills of pike in , low oxygen levels in big chunks of the river, and listening to stories about the sad state of the river.”

Dave Christensen Alberta Fish and Wildlife

Dave Christensen 1978, Lacombe Lake As in past days, drinking, swimming, fishing in untreated river water is still normal in NSR headwaters Battle River June 2009

When will this be unacceptable? Battle River 2009 2010 42% White Suckers had lesions

This is not normal! Elsewhere… Doherty et al. (2005). WQRJ Can. White suckers in St John River NB near pulp mills, hydroelectric, etc. “During this community survey, a significant number of white sucker (Catostomus commersoni) were captured with external lesions (4–12% occurrence in adults), identifying a potential area of concern in the river reach near the Beechwood hydroelectric facility, as lesions in the species are rarely reported” When will this be unacceptable? When will this be unacceptable? Headwaters protection? This is illegal

Photos from Alberta OHVA website ???

Backcountry East Slopes When will this be unacceptable? south of Cadomin (Ruby Falls area, July 2005) Consequences of ineffective land use regulations

Battle River, March 2010 Consequences of ineffective land use regulations

Winter Oxygen Study: Battle River Feb/March 2010

Oxygen Levels

Good (>6.5 mg/l)

Few fish (3 – 6.5 mg/l)

Dead fish (< 3 mg/l)

Winter oxygen measurements along the Battle River (Feb., March 2010) and IBI scores of fish biodiversity from Stevens and Council (2008). Alberta’s Provincial Fish - Bull Trout

NSR Headwaters Alberta’s Provincial Fish - Bull Trout

NSR Headwaters Good news stories LKST returned! Still no where near recovered (probably <100 adult females), but hopeful 250 (2+) fish/mile = 400 fish/km 1.5 fish/acre = 3.7 fish/ha

20 / km

16 / km

12 / km

8 / km

4 / km

Assume @ stratum = 250 km Good news stories

O’Dell Spring Creek, Montana

47 cm brown (18.5 inches) Good news stories

800 O'Dell Spring Creek O'Dell Spring Creek (stocking experiment) North Raven 1973 700 North Raven 1985 Habitat work North Raven 1995 600 North Raven 2005

500 Similar densities to Montana spring creeks Large variation in recruitment (flow? water quality?) 400 Fish / km 300 O’Dell Spring Creek, Montana 200

100

3 3 1 8 2 1 47 cm brown 0 (18.5 inches) 8.9 - 25 25 - 46 >46 Size of (cm) 2 Livingstone River CPUE Crowsnest Pass Area So how are we doing compared 1.8 Dutch Creek CPUE Cutt Fishery to our neighbours? 1.6 CPUE

1.4

(fish/hr) 1.2 effort 1 unit

0.8 per

0.6 Catch Montana quality 1.6 Crowsnest R. Rainbow Fishery 0.4 1.4

0.2 1.2 (fish/hr)

0 1 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year CPUE (all size classes) effort 0.8 CPUE (fish > 300mm) unit

0.6 per

Montana threshold for quality angling

0.4 Catch

0.2

0 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Slot size limit Year Minimum (30‐40 cm) Bag limit size limit (25 introduced, bag redcued from 3 cm) limit reduced to 2 introduced from 5 to 3

John Nishi, Will Stelfox

Alberta pipelines often old, potential for accidents

Link to spill map Alberta walleye grow slow and spawn at old ages

10 = low sustainable harvests 9 8 7 6 N. Ontario 5 Walleye populations across US and Canada

4 GDD S. Ontario 3 Alberta walleye 2 Wisconsin Tennessee 1

Age to 50% Female Maturity (years) Age to 50% Female 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Growing Degree-Days (degree-days > 50c)

from Baccante and Colby (1995) Good economy attracts fishermen Good economy attracts fishermen

Alberta’s Fish Dilemma: 10 ha = maximum sustainable harvest of 3 (big) to 10 (small) walleye 10 ha = 20 – 40+ anglers How do we get 10 ha = 3 big walleye? 1) Estimate walleye numbers - Pop’n est and FWIN 2010 (2527 ha) 2) Objective: Stable or Trophy? - stakeholder decision Walleye > 43cm = 4.3/ha - trade-off between harvest and size of fish Objective =10/ha 3) Calculate Total Allowable Catch (TAC) - simple math Plan: recover, with some harvest - 5% (trophy or recovery-focus) - 10% (harvest -focus) TAC = 5% of pop’n = 0.2/ha (2 in10ha)

TAC walleye >43cm = 543 fish Angler Effort at Buck (2008) = 20,000 anglers

= must share each fish with 37 anglers Low Productivity meets Heavy Fishing Pressure

Success rate of anglers 80 Restricted access

Open access 60 Air Weapons Range

Edmonton

40

Calgary

20 % Success (walleye kept)% Success (walleye

0 COLD WOLF HILDA ETHEL AMISK MOOSE MOORE MURIEL GARNER SPENCER KEHEWIN BAPTISTE SKELETON PRIMROSE GREGOIRE STE. ANNE PINEHURST IRONWOOD FRENCHMAN NORTH BUCK TOUCHWOOD’84 TOUCHWOOD’89 FLOATINGSTONE Road-accessible Alberta lakes collapsed by 1990s Traditional (MSY) fisheries management had failed - minor changes seasons, bag and size limits in recreational fisheries - focused on single lakes with local regulations (but have hundreds of lakes) Precautionary strategy implemented (post-1996)

Biologists collect data (= allowable harvest) Anglers decide on sharing (= regs) STATUS (Biologists) POLICY (Managers)

REGULATION (Anglers) HIGH HIGH STABLE Moderate Harvest 43 cm Min. VULNERABLE Low Harvest 50 cm Min. YOUNG YOUNG MODERATE MODERATE TROPHY COLLAPSED Low Harvest No Harvest Catch & Catch & Release Release LOW LOW

LOW MODERATE HIGH ADULTS Angler catch rates for catching walleye (Creel surveys at road-accessible lakes pre-1990s size limits, post - 1996 size limits)

2.5

2.0

1.6 fish/h MSY management (pre-1989) 1.5 Precautionary management (1996 - 2001) post – 2001 (1st -2nd generation walleye) 1.0 Catch/Hour

0.7 fish/h 0.5 MSY era CPUE goal 0.2 fish/h 0.0 Pine Cold Wolf Moose Pigeon Smoke Seibert Beaver Iosegun Baptiste L. Slave Pinehurst Shiningb. Growth-overfished stocks Recruitment-overfished stocks Siebert Lake Pike Fisheries 1971 (R. Makowecki creel survey) 1992 (F&W creel survey)

0.07 1971 1992

0.06

0.05

0.04

0.03 Angling CUE (kept/h) Angling CUE

0.02

0.01

0 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 Pike fork length (mm) Long-term trends in angler catch rates for catching pike 3.8

1.4 1969 (officer checks)

1980s (creel surveys) Harvest rates

1.2 1990s (creel surveys)

2000s (creel and FWIN) Total catch rates 1

0.8

0.6

0.4

Pike catch rates (angling) rates catch Pike 0.2

0 a Wolf Cold Hild Moose Kehiwin N. Buck IronwoodPinehurst Floatingstone Fisheries Management Objective: “Stable-Recreational Fisherv - managed to provide good catch Pike rates of pike, but not necessarily large fish.” (Alberta Pike Management Plan 1999, page vii)

1.4

1985 (no size) 2005 (63 min) 1.2 Size 2010 (63-100 prot slot) limit

1

0.8 Slot limits fail when harvest kept high

0.6

0.4 FWIN (or equivalent) PIKE CUE

0.2

0 0 50 950 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 100 150 200 250 850 900 1000 FL (mm) Monitoring 2000 – 2012 = even simpler system practical HIGH HIGH STABLE

50 cm (or very large slot) province-wide Harvest A few lakes with tags

Catch & Release No Harvest YOUNG YOUNG COLLAPSED MODERATE MODERATE TROPHY LOW LOW

LOW MODERATE HIGH ADULTS Apply this simple, successful system to all fisheries (streams and lakes)

Alberta’s Fish Report Card = Fish Sustainability Index - each species and 30 watershed gets scored - scores reflect fish status and threats - trends in score = success or failure - full public transparency of data and results Fish Sustainability Index (FSI) - On the surface

Simple scores (1 to 5) Population Integrity Rigorous rule set (40 pages) (is the fish pop’n healthy?) 8 parameters Productive Potential (was it naturally weak or healthy?) 3 parameters Consistent Threat Mitigation Transparent (how much attention does it need?) 5 parameters Loss of Christina River Grayling

Martin Paetz (former Fisheries Director) - in 1967, he went in to film a CBC film. He stood in one spot and got 33 grayling, all over 12 inches in less than an hour. - in 1987 he went back to the same spot. Two people fishing hard for two days caught seven grayling, one over 12 inches.

Oil Sands Aquatic Monitoring Program (Christina River) From 1984 to 2001, 21 angling studies caught 0 grayling From 2001 to 2010, electrofishing studies (207 studies) caught a total of 2 fish Loss of Christina River Grayling Arctic Grayling FSI (early)

62 watersheds with grayling < 20% intact pop’ns

5 watersheds considered “good” (numerous small fish, fewer adults) Lower Little Smoky, Caribou Mtns. Christina At least 10 populations lost Several more suspected lost

Not a pretty picture…but important to show the big picture Down-scaled FSI: Simonette River

Grayling Anthropogenic Risk Scores

- Very useful for describing present level of risk in the context of fish during DFMP development Above 20% to 30% land disturbance (agri, forestry, roads), former grayling streams became anoxic during winter Alberta’s stream habitats and fishes showing effects of people and development Main Issues: 1) (green water) 2) Flow (less groundwater) 3) Access and overharvest

Solution for better fishing: fewer roads , more trees, less footprint

So how are we doing compared to our neighbours? Brown Trout don’t like Alberta’s cold

Extensive stocking, no sustainable fisheries

Raven is unusual Extensive stocking, -warm ground water, Few sustainable fisheries in a cold climate

No Extensive stocking,Groundwater is warm Browns Large, sustainable fisheries

Hinton 1100

RMH 1200 Bow River 1300

Good Southern Montana Browns Excellent, sustainable Helena, Livingstone, Billings fisheries 2273 (700 km south of ) Loss of groundwater = colder, frozen streams = poor recruitment, winterkill

Winter snowfall, North

140

120

100

80

60

40

20 Mean winter precipitation (mm equiv.) (mm winterprecipitation Mean

0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Year Loss of groundwater = frozen streams = winterkill = and droughts What we do on the land affects the streams and fish

Headwaters <20% cleared Lower reaches 30% cleared What we do on the land affects the streams and fish What we do on the land affects the streams and fish What we do on the land affects the streams and fish

Miette River Valley, JNP

Miette River July 2008 So how are we doing compared 1.6 Rainbows = still excellent Browns = still good to our past? 1.4 RNTR CUE Bull, Elk, Michel, Skookumchuck, BNTR CUE St. Mary, White, Wigwam rivers 1.2 Catch rate (mean) from 2004 Bow River Trout Fisheries 1 - past 20 years 0.8

0.6 Montana quality angling

0.4 Angling Catch (fish/h)Rate

0.2

0 1985 2006

From 1985 to 2006, 150% increase in # of trout caught

John Nishi, Will Stelfox Bow River July 2004 Alberta’s basic fisheries issues

Lake fisheries (walleye and pike)

10 hectares of northern lake -sustainable harvest 10 walleye (small) or 3 walleye (big) -attracts effort of 20+ angler-days Must share 1 fish with many anglers Stream fisheries (trout & grayling)

Habitat shared with forestry, agriculture, petro -Many streams lost in non-protected areas -Increasing pressure on few remaining streams Must share fewer fish with more anglers

= trade-offs between stakeholders

Problem: too many ineffective regs and rules, failing to communicate and solve the real issues

Lesser 17 Feb 2013 Solutions

Improve and simplify regulations

Provide anglers and public with clear, transparent status of fisheries (FSI)

Give industry meaningful, useful information of effects on fish (FSI and dose-response curves)

Thank you! Alberta is a cold, northern place to be a fish

- boreal, sub-arctic climatWisconsine (7 months5 yr-old walleyeice-cover) Alberta 15-30 yr-old walleye - cool, short summers (July max. 180 -200)

540 N

Collision of northern productivity and Land of southern pressure Saturday Morning Fishing Shows

Alberta is a good ($) place to be a person Hi folks just passing on some good news on PLAR being consistently implemented in the West country by our local RCMP. We typically provide between 10 – 20 impact statements for OHV’s driving in creeks out of the Rocky Office each year. Many of these statements are used for more than one offence on the same waterbody or within the same drainage. Minimum fines are $500 and we have been getting much higher fines than that. In one case the crown kept the offender’s ATV and returned a second ATV after holding it for nearly a year. John Tchir

From: Wayne HOWSE [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 11:05 AM To: John Tchir Cc: Patrick CAVANAGH Subject: Re: Vetch Creek Impact Statement

Both individuals plead guilty and received $650 fines.

>>> Wayne HOWSE 2014/05/29 1:18 AM >>> Hi John, on May 18th, 2014 Cst Cavanaugh and I charged 2 individuals for driving in Vetch Creek and both are appearing on July 9th, 2014. They were driving in and obviously washing ( pushing mud etc off). I believe you had provided a impact statement last year on this creek. Just wondering if you could provide us with another updated one.

Thanks

Wayne

Good news stories

Walleye Battle, Beaver, NSR cue graphs