Background Report

Freshwater and

Anadromous Fish and Fish

Habitat in the North Coast

October, 2003

Prepared by: Dave Gordon, R.P.Bio. Melinda Bahr, M.Sc. R.P.Bio Gordon and Associates Ltd. PO Box 1085, Terrace, BC, V8G 4V1

Executive Summary

This report was compiled by Gordon and Associates Ltd. in the spring of 2003 in support of the North Coast Land and Resource Management Planning process. Information about fish and fish habitat in the North Coast is housed with a number of provincial and federal agencies, as well as First Nations and community level organizations. The intent of the report is to bring together available information about the various types of fish and fish habitat in the North Coast plan area and summarize information about current management.

The report provides a summary of the life histories of the fish species known to inhabit the area. Escapement data for Pacific salmon is summarized as is distribution and information about other freshwater fish.

Trends in salmon escapement over the period of record (1950-2001) were identified using DFO data on salmon escapement for streams in the plan area. A total of 543 individual stocks have been documented in the area. Data analysis indicates that salmon escapement across the landbase is in substantial decline. Specifically:

• 75% of known chinook stocks appear to be “Potentially threatened” or “Of Some Concern”

• 69% of known chum stocks appear to be “Potentially threatened” or “Of Some Concern”

• 72% of known coho stocks appear to be “Potentially threatened” or “Of Some Concern”

• 31% of known pink stocks appear to be “Potentially threatened” or “Of Some Concern”

• 45% of known sockeye stocks appear to be “Potentially threatened” or “Of Some Concern”

Of the 167 known salmon streams, only 26 do not have salmon stocks identified as “Potentially Threatened” or “Of Some Concern”. This analysis of escapement data is preliminary. Further analysis of the data, including referral to local people familiar with the area is recommended to confirm whether the DFO escapement data are reflecting actual escapements. All escapement data have been summarized in a database, portions of which are printed out as Appendix I. The complete database has been provided to MSRM as a project deliverable.

The cause of this decline has not been identified in this report. However, it can be speculated that land use practices do not appear to be the leading cause as many of the watersheds where stock decline is apparent have not been subject to resource development activities.

Page i

Existing data on freshwater resident species was also reviewed, and incorporated into a database. Such information was often limited to presence/absence and local knowledge. Watershed scale inventory information is extremely limited. Dolly Varden char and cutthroat trout appear to be the most widely distributed fish species in the plan area. 263 streams are listed in the database of which 117 (44.5%) are known to have cutthroat trout, and 172 (57%) are known to have Dolly Varden.

The Community Fisheries Development Centre was sub-contracted through this work to summarize 4 years of coho rearing data that was collected through their organization. Local fisheries specialist Bart Proctor wrote the summary report, and provided an Overall Index of Rearing Productivity for the 79 streams assessed. The top three areas for rearing coho were identified as the lower Skeena, Grenville and Kincolith. Streams in the lower Skeena area include Kwinitsa, Antigonish, Aberdeen, Marigonish, Inver, Basalt, Stapledon, and Valley (Khyex). Proctor hypothesizes that streams in the lower Skeena serve as a temporary refuge area for out-migrating coho juveniles prior to them entering the ocean. The Grenville area also includes streams near the mouth of the Skeena River and the Kincolith area includes streams near the mouth of the Nass River. Proctor’s report has been previously submitted to the GTT for circulation to the table.

The report also includes a summary of existing legislation that is intended to provide protection to fish and riparian areas (with respect to fish habitat). A brief overview of current forestry practices being used to protect fish and fish habitat is provided, as well as reference to the MoF/MoE Resource Management Plan initiated in 2000 that identifies priority watersheds for restoration, and notes the stage of completion attained for restoration activities. The report does not provide a summary or review of non fish riparian values (ie, tailed frog, wildlife, biodiversity, etc.).

This report was extensively reviewed by MSRM and LRMP staff, and was provided to the Government Technical Team and DFO for review. A summary of review comments and how or whether they were integrated into the report is also provided.

Page ii

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...... I

1.0 INTRODUCTION...... 1

2.0 METHODS...... 1 2.1 ANALYSIS OF DFO SALMON ESCAPEMENT DATA ...... 2 2.1.1 Morrell (2000) Ranking of Streams to indicate Stock Status ...... 3 2.1.2 Cautionary Notes on Data Interpretation ...... 4 2.2 ANALYSIS OF RESIDENT FISH INFORMATION...... 5 3.0 RESULTS...... 6 3.1 FISH SPECIES IN THE NORTH COAST LRMP AREA...... 6 3.1.1 Pacific Salmon...... 7 3.1.2 Salmonids other than Pacific Salmon ...... 12 3.1.3 Eulachon...... 15 3.1.4 Sticklebacks ...... 15 3.1.5 Sculpins ...... 16 3.1.6 Mountain Whitefish ...... 16 3.1.7 Lamprey...... 17 3.2 ESCAPEMENT TRENDS OF PACIFIC SALMON BASED ON DFO ESCAPEMENT DATA .... 17 3.2.1 Chinook Salmon ...... 17 3.2.2 Chum Salmon ...... 18 3.2.3 Coho Salmon ...... 19 3.2.4 Pink Salmon...... 20 3.2.5 Sockeye Salmon ...... 21 3.2.6 Summary of Escapement Trends for Pacific Salmon ...... 22 3.3 SUMMARY OF FRESHWATER (NON PACIFIC SALMON) INFORMATION, AND WATERSHEDS WITH UNIQUE OR VULNERABLE FISH VALUES...... 24 3.4 REVIEW OF COMMUNITY COLLECTED REARING DATA (PROCTOR, 2003) ...... 26 3.5 SUMMARY OF EXISTING LEGISLATION, POLICY AND GUIDEBOOKS ...... 27 3.6 SUMMARY OF CURRENT FORESTRY MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ADJACENT TO STREAMS AND RIPARIAN AREAS ...... 33 4.0 SUMMARY OF EXISTING WATERSHED RESTORATION PRIORITIES...... 35

5.0 REFERENCES...... 37

Page iii

List of Tables

Table 1. Summary of Stock Status Classes for salmon in the North Coast LRMP area...... 4 Table 2: List of fish species and number of documented stocks in the North Coast LRMP Area...... 6 Table 3. Max and Mean escapement data (1950-2001) for chinook streams in the NC LRMP area that have average escapements >500 fish...... 8 Table 4. Max and Mean escapement data (1950-2001) for chum streams in the NC LRMP area that have average escapements >2000 fish...... 9 Table 5. Max and Mean escapement data (1950-2001) for coho streams in the NC LRMP area that have average escapements >1500 fish...... 10 Table 6. Max and Mean escapement data (1950-2001) for pink streams in the NC LRMP area that have average escapements >10000 fish...... 11 Table 7. Max and Mean escapement data (1950-2001) for sockeye streams in the NC LRMP area that have average escapements >1500 fish...... 12 Table 8. Summary of escapement data for chinook salmon from 1950-2001...... 18 Table 9. Summary of escapement data for chum salmon from 1950-2001...... 19 Table 10. Summary of escapement data for coho salmon from 1950-2001...... 20 Table 11. Summary of escapement data for pink salmon from 1950-2001...... 21 Table 12. Summary of escapement data for sockeye salmon from 1950-2001...... 22 Table 13: Summary of Escapement Trends for Salmon in the NC LRMP Area...... 22 Table 14: Comparison of Escapement Evaluation Methods between Slaney (1996) and Morrel (2000)...... 23 Table 15: Comparison of Stock Assessment Results with Slaney et al (1996)...... 24 Table 16. List of freshwater fish species and their presence in North Coast streams...... 25 Table 17. Fish species at risk on the North Coast with their NatureServe and BC Status designations. Explanations of the rankings are given below the table...... 29 Table 18: Stream, Wetland and Lake Reserve and Management Zones...... 30 Table 19: Summary of WRP status in priority watersheds in the North Coast...... 35

List of Appendices

Appendix I. DFO Salmon Escapement Database Appendix II. Resident Fish Species Database Appendix III. Abbreviated summary of BC Riparian Guidebook Approach to Riparian Management for streams Appendix IV. Table of 26 streams that are Unthreatened in the North Coast LRMP area. Appendix V. Streams in the North Coast LRMP area that may have potentially unique or vulnerable fish stocks, or that have identified recreation potential. Appendix VI: Documentation of Comments by GTT and DFO reviewers.

Page iv

1.0 Introduction

Gordon and Associates Ltd. was contracted by the Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management to provide expertise towards the development of General Management Direction (GMD) for fish and associated riparian values for the North Coast LRMP.

This report provides a summary and review of the existing fisheries and riparian information used in the preparation of the (GMD). Specifically, it provides:

• A summary of fish values (Pacific salmon and other species) in the plan area. • A review and analysis of DFO escapement data for the plan area. • A summary of coho rearing data collected by North Coast communities, and as analysed by Bart Proctor through the Community Fisheries Development Centre (2003). • Identification of watersheds with fish values that may be considered as potentially unique, or vulnerable, or that have recreational fishing significance. • A summary of existing legislation and guidelines that currently provide protection or management direction to fish and/or riparian values in the plan area. • A summary of current management practices used by industry to protect fish and/or riparian habitat. • A summary of existing identified priorities for watershed restoration.

2.0 Methods

Streams in the North Coast LRMP area were examined for salmon escapement trends, presence of resident fish species, as well as potential uniqueness, recreation (fishing) and vulnerability of their fish stocks. The stream analysis included data compiled from a number of sources including:

• A DFO Salmon Escapement Database providing escapements from 1950-2001 for chinook, chum, coho, pink and sockeye salmon • Identification (by local experts, and Sarma Liepins, MSRM) of fish stocks that could be potentially unique or vulnerable, or have recreation potential • Resident fish information included in the Fisheries Inventory Summary System (FISS) database • Resident fish information gathered from other sources (ie. FISS update contract, relevant lake and stream inventories, local knowledge) • Resident fish information and juvenile coho information provided by Bart Proctor resulting from the North Coast Stream Inventory Program (1998-2001), the Oona River Stream Inventory Program (1998) and the Fisheries Charter Vessels Survey Program (1998-2001).

The compilation of data has resulted in two databases that are provided in Appendix I (DFO Escapement Data) and Appendix II (Resident Fish Data). Electronic versions of these databases have been provided to MSRM.

Page 1

2.1 Analysis of DFO Salmon Escapement Data

DFO escapement data are collected by a wide range of personnel including volunteers, fisheries guardians and officers, fisheries technicians, and fisheries biologists. Typically, streams are walked from their mouth upstream and personnel count adult fish. Occasionally, counts are completed from aircraft (helicopters or float planes) or enumeration fences are installed in streams. Streams may be assessed for spawners once or many times throughout the season, depending on the species of fish present, availability of access to the stream and funding. Some streams may not be assessed every year. The data recorded for escapement cannot be considered to be precise, as techniques for enumerating salmon are imprecise. A variety of factors influence salmon enumeration, including; experience of the person counting, clarity of the water, length of stream to be enumerated, and spawning period of the fish. Counts for coho are especially difficult, as they spawn over a protracted period, travel far upstream into small tributaries, and may be difficult to see in coastal streams. Due to budget constraints, DFO based efforts to enumerate salmon have declined in recent years. Actual escapement are likely greater than reported for many species and stocks.

Although numerous flaws in the data may exist, the data do provide a practical gauge to general abundance and potential trends. Potential trends in escapement for each species can be identified by examining the annual counts over the 52 years of record (1950-2001). Escapement data were collated and analysed for each of the 5 species of Pacific salmon for every stream on record (n=167). A summary of the data base is in Appendix 1. This database shows:

• Historical maximum for each species and each stream, • Mean escapement for each decade (1950’s, 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, 1990-2001), • Mean escapement for the period of record (1950-2001), • Historical mean escapement (1950-1989), • Calculated % of recent mean escapement (1990-2001) to historical mean escapement (1950- 1989).

It is not practical to identify what a stream’s optimum escapement may be. This may vary from year to year depending on the habitat conditions present each year and the fish species present. The historical maximum escapement is a number of interest as it may represent the productive capacity of the stream (ie, its optimum escapement). However, it can be impractical for stream enumerators to accurately count thousands (or hundreds of thousands) of fish, and as such these peak numbers may not be accurate and need to viewed with caution. As well, over escapement can result in super imposition of redds (fish spawning on top of previously spawned areas) which may reduce the survival rate of incubating eggs. The historical maximum escapement was not used in the analysis, but is presented for information purposes only. We chose to compare recent mean escapements (12 year average, 1990 to 2001) to historical mean escapements (40 year average, 1950 to 1989). Historical mean escapement may not be the best measure of a stream’s escapement potential as stock decline may be masked if the decline occurred during this 40 year historical period, however it is a practical and relatively robust way of gauging how well a stream has produced over time, and for most streams, it is the only measure available.

The calculations listed above were used to identify potential trends in escapement following the methodology of Morrell (2000). The intent of these analyses is to identify stocks that may be in decline, and as such may require further investigation as to their status. Watersheds where such stocks are confirmed to be in decline may be candidates for precautionary land use practices such

Page 2

that further stresses upon the stock are minimized. As well, these data have been summarized to provide an information source to guide land use managers in assessing risk to salmonid populations from land use activities.

Following is a detailed account of the methodology developed by Morrell (2000) that was used to identify stock status of Pacific salmon populations on the North Coast.

2.1.1 Morrell (2000) Ranking of Streams to indicate Stock Status

Mike Morrell (2000) analysed stock status in the Skeena River system using a combination of the trend of escapement records since 1950 and the average number of spawners observed since 1990. This analysis was applied in this report to streams in the North Coast LRMP Area, and provided a means to determine potential stock status. For the purposes of this analysis, each species in each stream was considered to be a separate stock or breeding population.

Prior to classifying stocks, streams were screened to determine if they had enough records to draw a reliable conclusion regarding their stock status. Stocks from streams that did not have enough records were divided into two categories:

U-P: Status unknown—the record does not support that this was ever an established, persisting stock. Fewer than 4 annual records of 50 or more spawners (sockeye and pink) or 25 or more spawners (chinook, coho, chum) were identified for that stream. These stocks were identified as “Questionable”.

NRR: No recent records—more than 4 annual records above the criterion level outlined for U-P, but no recorded escapement since 1990. This category may include stocks that have gone extinct since 1950. It may also include healthy stocks that have not been monitored in the 1990s due to geographical isolation, DFO budget constraints or other reasons.

Once streams were screened for appropriate records, stock status was designated using a calculation of escapement trend (ET). The escapement trend was calculated as the ratio of the average (mean) of all the records from 1990-2001 to the average of 1950-1989 records. (ie. ET = mean escapement (1990-2001) divided by mean escapement (1950-1989)). If ET was 1.0 or larger, then recent escapement estimates are at least as large as historical records from 1950-1989. ET classes were categorized as:

Stock Increasing ET>1.5 Stock Stable 0.5≤ET≤1.5 Stock in Decline ET<0.5 Stock in Precipitous Decline ET<0.2

These categories were further divided based on the mean escapement in the 1990s. For example:

Population Stable or Increasing

L: Low risk of extinction—Mean escapement 1990-2001 (M90s) 200 or more. S-1: Special concern, historically small stock, now apparently stable—M90s less than 200. S-4: Special concern, apparently stable, maintained by enhancement.

Page 3

Stock in Decline

M: Potentially moderate risk of extinction— M90s less than or equal to 1000. (Stocks in this ET range with M90s below 50 (sockeye and pink) or 25 (chinook, coho, chum) were classed as H, High risk of extinction.) S-3: Special concern—historically large stock, now depleted—M90s more than 1000.

Stocks in precipitous decline

H: Potentially high risk of extinction— M90s less than 200. M: Potentially moderate risk of extinction— M90s between 200 and 1000. S-3: Potential special concern, historically large stock, now depleted— M90s more than 1000.

After each stock was categorized to this level, the database was summarized for each species into five intuitive groups; Unthreatened, Of Some Concern, Potentially Threatened, Unknown Status or Questionable. A summary of these groups is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Summary of Stock Status Classes for salmon in the North Coast LRMP area. Category Code Description

Unthreatened L Low risk of extinction Of some concern S-1 Small stock—apparently stable S-3 Historically large population—now depleted. Apparently not at immediate risk of extinction Potentially Threatened H Potentially at high risk of extinction M Potentially at moderate risk of extinction Status unknown U-N Insufficient data to determine status. No evidence of depletion. NRR No recent records—may be extinct. Questionable U-P May not correspond to distinct spawning stock

2.1.2 Cautionary Notes on Data Interpretation

It is important to note that the quality of the DFO escapement data may lead to false interpretation of what is actually occurring on the ground. Reduced effort in salmon spawner enumeration is likely to result in lower spawning counts than may actually exist. Due to the uncertainty regarding the actual status of these stocks, we have deliberately used the modifier “potentially” when describing stocks at risk.

DFO has expressed concerns that the terminology used in this report may be confused with the terms used under Species at Risk legislation. The categories defined above are not linked to categories used by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) and the Species at Risk Act (SARA). Following is a brief summary of the relevant COSEWIC definitions and criteria:

COSEWIC provides scientific advice to governments regarding the status of species potentially at risk, and has developed the following definitions (COSEWIC 2003):

Page 4

Extinct: No longer occurring anywhere. Extirpated: A species no longer existing in the wild in Canada, but exists elsewhere in the world. Endangered: A species facing imminent extirpation or extinction. Threatened: A species likely to become endangered if nothing is done to reverse the factors leading to extirpation or extinction. Special Concern: Those species that are particularly sensitive to human activities or natural events but are not endangered or threatened species.

COSEWIC also provides quantitative criteria and guidelines for the status assessment of species. The most relevant criteria for fish populations on the North Coast occurs under the criteria of “Declining Total Population” where:

“population size reduction that is observed, estimated, inferred or suspected over the last 10 years or 3 generations, whichever is longer, where the reduction or its causes may not have ceased OR may not be understood OR may not be reversible, based on (and specifying) any combination of a-e below. a) direct observation b) an index of abundance appropriate for the taxon c) a decline in area of occupancy, extent of occurrence and/or quality of habitat d) actual or potential levels of exploitation e) the effects of introduced taxa, hybridisation, pathogens, pollutants, competitors or parasites”

Where this population decrease is >70% the population may be considered “Endangered” and where the population decrease is > 30% the population may be considered “Threatened”.

It would be premature to link the analysis in this report to any potential status under COSEWIC. Further analysis of other factors that may affect the data, and improved ground truthing of actual escapement numbers is recommended.

2.2 Analysis of Resident Fish Information

Appendix II contains the resident fish species (non Pacific salmon) data, compiled from FISS, resident fish information supplied by Bart Proctor, knowledge from local experts, a FISS update report (Zimmerling et al. 2001) and various lake inventory reports (Mason 1998, Mason and Adams 1997, Mason and Williams 1998, Mason et al. 1997). Little quantitative information exists on resident fish in the plan area. As such, the database is generally limited to presence/absence information. The uniqueness, recreation potential and vulnerability of fish stocks in these streams has also been included with a column for explanation. This qualitative information has been gathered from Watersheds BC (WBC-based on FISS data), North Coast Stream Inventory Program (NCSI), Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection (WLAP) through a rich ecosystem analysis (Sarma Liepins), and input by local experts (LK). Descriptions of the categories are as follows:

Uniqueness: These streams have fish stocks that may be in some way distinct or uncommon, such as summer run steelhead, anadromous cutthroat, anadromous Dolly Varden or eulachon.

Page 5

Recreation Potential: These streams are highly valued for recreational fishing or other pursuits related to the presence of fish such as viewing of wildlife during eulachon or salmon runs, viewing salmon migrating past waterfalls or viewing based on abundance.

Vulnerability: These streams may be at risk of over exploitation or are dependent on habitats which are considered sensitive to disturbance. Fish stocks that are at risk of over-harvesting based on angling guide management system reports and fish harvest and escapement data are included in this category.

3.0 Results

This section provides an overview of the fish species on the North Coast and their general life histories. Information about particularly abundant runs of each species of Pacific salmon is provided as well as information about recent trends in escapement. To keep the report succinct, only select salmon runs have been identified in the text (ie., the largest runs, or those runs in substantial decline). While these runs are likely to be of the most interest to table members and stakeholders in the plan area, it is not inferred here that smaller runs of salmon are of less significance, or may be managed to a low standard. The continued health of all salmon runs is a key objective of LRMP table members. A complete list of all streams and salmon populations is included in Appendix 1.

This section also provides summaries of:

• Existing information on resident fish (non Pacific salmon) species, • Information about potentially unique or vulnerable watersheds, and those that have been identified as having high recreational fishing value (Liepins, undated). • Coho rearing assessments completed by North Coast communities through the Community Fisheries Development Centre. • Existing Legislation, Policy and Guidebooks • Current Forestry Management Practices adjacent to streams and riparian areas

3.1 Fish species in the North Coast LRMP Area

The North Coast LRMP area is known to support at least 36 species of fish (Table 2). Pacific salmon are the fish of greatest concern, given their well documented ecological, economic and cultural values. DFO has documented salmon spawning in 167 streams in the North Coast LRMP area.

Table 2: List of fish species and number of documented stocks in the North Coast LRMP Area. Fish Species Latin Name

chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha coho salmon O. kisutch chum salmon O. keta Page 6

Fish Species Latin Name

pink salmon O. gorbuscha sockeye salmon O. nerka cutthroat trout O. clarki anadromous cutthroat trout O. clarki kokanee O. nerka rainbow trout O. mykiss steelhead O. mykiss Atlantic salmon Salmo salar eulachon Thaleichthys pacificus bull trout Salvelinus confluentus Dolly Varden S. malma anadromous Dolly Varden S. malma mountain whitefish Prosopium williamsoni three-spine stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus coastrange sculpin Cottus aleuticus slimy sculpin C. cognatus prickly sculpin C. asper river lamprey Lampetra ayresi pacific lamprey Entosphenus tridentatus western brook lamprey Lampetra richardsoni green sturgeon Acipenser medirostris shad (introduced) Alosa sapidissima peamouth chub Mylocheilus caurinus northern pikeminnow Ptochocheilus oregonensis longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae redside shiner Richardsonius balteatus longnose sucker Catostomus catostomus largescale sucker Catostomus macrocheilus rainbow smelt Osmerus mordax longfin smelt Spirinchus thaleichthys Pacific staghorn sculpin Leptocottus armatus starry flounder (estuary) Platichthys stellatus burbot Lota lota northern redbelly dace Chrosomus eos pygmy whitefish Prosopium coulteri

3.1.1 Pacific Salmon

Chinook Salmon

Description Chinook salmon are the largest Pacific salmon on the North Coast, occasionally growing up to 58 inches (147 cm) and sometimes weighing over a hundred pounds.

Page 7

Life Cycle Chinook salmon are usually between 2 and 9 years of age when they return to freshwater to spawn. Adults may migrate up rivers at all times of the year, however, on the North Coast, migration usually occurs in the last half of June through August, and spawning generally occurs between August and October. Redds are usually composed of larger gravel and located in deeper areas than other Pacific salmon. Incubation happens over the winter, and eggs hatch in the spring. Most fry remain in fresh water for up to a year before smolting and migrating to the ocean. Adults die after spawning, and contribute significant marine derived biomass to the freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems.

Escapement Data Of the 167 salmon bearing streams on the North Coast, 20 have runs of chinook salmon. Of these, 4 are identified as questionable stocks (fewer than 4 annual records of 25 or more spawners). A complete list of all chinook streams is included in Appendix I and escapement trends are presented in Section 3.2.1. Chinook salmon counts are potentially the most reliable counts, as the fish are readily visible and spawning occurs at a predictable time each year.

Table 3 lists those streams that have average escapements >500 fish (the threshold of 500 is arbitrary). Historically, some streams have had substantially large escapements including:

• Johnston Creek, 7,500 in 1969 • Kwinamass River, 5,000 in 1968 • Khutzeymateen River, 5,000 in 1968 • Ecstall River, 3,800 in 1988

Table 3. Max and Mean escapement data (1950-2001) for chinook streams in the NC LRMP area that have average escapements >500 fish.

Stream Name Max Mean Ecstall River 3800 1476 Johnston Creek 7500 1424 Kwinamass River 5000 851 Khutzeymateen River 5000 511

Chum Salmon

Description Chum salmon average 7 to 10 pounds (3.5 to 4.5 kg) and can be more than 100 cm in length at maturity.

Life Cycle Chum salmon are usually between 3 and 4 years of age when they return to freshwater to spawn. Adults migrate up rivers between July and September on the North Coast, and spawning generally occurs in August and September, but may occur as early as the last half of July or as late as October. Spawning occurs in freshwater, but usually takes place close to estuaries and adults rarely attempt to migrate upstream past obstructions. Incubation happens over the winter, and eggs hatch from late December until late February. Chum fry spend very little time in freshwater, and migrate to the ocean in late April or early May, immediately after they emerge from the gravel. Adults die after

Page 8

spawning and contribute significant marine derived biomass to the freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems.

Escapement Data Of the 167 salmon bearing streams on the North Coast, 137 have supported runs of chum salmon. Of these, 27 are identified as questionable stocks (fewer than 4 records >25 spawners). A complete list of all chum streams is included in Appendix I and escapement trends are presented in Section 3.2.2. Table 4 lists those streams that have average escapements >2000 fish. Historically, some streams have had substantially large escapements including:

• Ecstall River, 75,000 in 1988 • Stagoo Creek, 70,000 in 1974 • Quall River, 65,000 in 1988 • Kshwan River, 50,000 in 1993

Table 4. Max and Mean escapement data (1950-2001) for chum streams in the NC LRMP area that have average escapements >2000 fish. Stream Max Mean Stagoo Creek 70,000 9,825 Ecstall River 75,000 9,370 Kshwan River 50,000 8,381 Quaal River 65,000 7,423 Khutzeymateen River 35,000 6,623 Toon River 40,000 6,294 Kiltuish River 35,000 5,777 Kitsault River 15,000 4,865 Illiance River 22,000 3,721 Kingkown Inlet System 13,000 2,796 Turn Creek 35,000 2,690 Eagle Creek 15,000 2,647 Kwinamass River 12,000 2,203 Kdelmashan Creek 7,500 2,007

Coho Salmon

Description Coho salmon grow in length to approximately 38 inches (98 cm) and weigh up to 31 pounds (14 kg), however, mature adults are usually between 6 and 12 pounds (2.7-5.4 kg).

Life Cycle Mature adults are usually between the ages of 3 and 5 and migrate to freshwater streams to spawn in the fall, between August and October. Spawning areas are usually small, gravelly streams and are often tributaries of a larger river. The spawning event usually takes place between August and December on the North Coast. Eggs incubate in the gravel over winter and hatch around April. Juvenile coho may spend up to two years rearing in freshwater tributary streams prior to smolting.

Page 9

The young can often be found around large boulders or log jams, and feed actively during the summer. Adults die after spawning and contribute significant marine derived biomass to the freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems.

Escapement data Of the 167 salmon bearing streams on the North Coast, 151 have supported runs of coho salmon. Of these, 22 are identified as questionable stocks (fewer than 4 records >25 spawners). A complete list of all coho streams is included in Appendix I and escapement trends are presented in Section 3.2.3. Table 5 lists those streams that have average escapements >1500 fish. Historically, some streams have had substantially large escapements including:

• Quaal River, 25,000 in 1966 • Kwinamass River, 20,000 in 1966 • Kingkown Inlet System, 15,000 in 1957 • Lowe Inlet System, 15,000 in 1966 • Quitonsta Creek, 15,000 in 1961

Table 5. Max and Mean escapement data (1950-2001) for coho streams in the NC LRMP area that have average escapements >1500 fish. Stream Name Max Mean Quaal River 25,000 4,608 Kwinamass River 20,000 3,833 Kingkown Inlet System 15,000 3,330 Lowe Inlet System 15,000 2,996 Quitonsta Creek 15,000 2,837 Khutzeymateen River 10,000 2,214 Eagle Creek 9,000 2,209 Ecstall River 10,000 1,871 Clifford Creek 7,500 1,765 End Hill Creek 7,500 1,736 Salmon Creek 7,500 1,724 Stannard Creek 7,500 1,672

Pink Salmon

Description This is the smallest of the Pacific salmon on the North Coast, with adults usually growing up to 30 inches long and weighing between 3 and 5 pounds (1.4-2.3 kg).

Life Cycle Adults usually migrate from the ocean to freshwater to spawn between August and September. Pink salmon are almost always two years old at maturity which often isolates even and odd year runs. Even year runs predominate in the North Coast. Pink salmon are not known to be strong swimmers, are rarely found above barriers in freshwater, and usually spawn in the lower reaches of main systems. Eggs incubate over the winter, and fry migrate immediately to the ocean after emergence, often using habitat in the intertidal areas adjacent to freshwater during their first summer in

Page 10

saltwater. Adults die after spawning and contribute significant marine derived biomass to the freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems.

Escapement Data Of the 167 salmon bearing streams on the North Coast, 164 have runs of pink salmon. Of these, 9 are identified as questionable stocks (fewer than 4 annual records of 50 or more spawners). A complete list of all pink streams is included in Appendix I and escapement trends are presented in Section 3.2.4. Table 6 lists those streams that have average escapements >10,000 fish. Historically, some streams have had substantially large escapements including:

• Quaal River, 1,500,000 in 1962 • Kitkiata Creek, 275,000 in 1963 • Kwinamass River, 250,000 in 1984 • Khutzeymateen River, 230,000 in 2001 • Khyex River, 220,000 in 1989 • Moore Cove Creek, 150,000 in 1999

Table 6. Max and Mean escapement data (1950-2001) for pink streams in the NC LRMP area that have average escapements >10000 fish. Stream Name Max Mean Quaal River 1,500,000 157,192 Kwinamass River 250,000 72,815 Moore Cove Creek 150,000 40,112 Kitkiata Creek 275,000 38,817 Kumealon Creek 120,000 35,048 Khutzeymateen River 230,000 34,070 Khyex River 220,000 22,143 Dogfish Bay Creek 60,000 13,516 Turn Creek 60,000 13,098 Kiskosh Creek 75,000 13,067 La Hou Creek 70,000 12,749 Gil Creek 60,000 12,159 Turtle Creek 43,000 10,424 Ecstall River 100,000 10,347 Oona River 50,000 10,266

Sockeye Salmon

Description Sockeye adults are usually 4 to 5 years old, range from approximately 3.0 to 5.5 kg and may grow in length to 33 inches (84 cm).

Life Cycle Sockeye spawn in rivers that feed into lakes, or in the outlets and spring-fed beaches of lakes. On the North Coast, sockeye migrate into freshwater between June and September to spawn between September and October. After fry emerge from the gravel in the spring, they migrate to a nursery lake (usually downstream) and spend 1-2 years in lakes prior to smolting in May or June. Adults die

Page 11

after spawning and contribute significant marine derived biomass to the freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems.

Escapement Data Of the 167 salmon bearing streams on the North Coast, 71 have runs of sockeye salmon. Of these, 23 are identified as questionable stocks (fewer than 4 annual records of 50 or more spawners). A complete list of all sockeye streams is included in Appendix I and escapement trends are presented in Section 3.2.5. Table 7 lists those streams that have average escapements >1500 fish. Historically, some streams have had substantially large escapements including:

• Lowe Inlet System, 35,000 in 1975 • Curtis Inlet System, 35,000 in 1963 • Quitonsta Creek, 15,000 in 1971 • Kooryet Creek, 15,000 in 1963 • Keecha Creek, 15,000 in 1959 • Devon Lake System, 15,000 in 1966

Table 7. Max and Mean escapement data (1950-2001) for sockeye streams in the NC LRMP area that have average escapements >1500 fish. Stream Name Max Mean Curtis Inlet Creek 35,000 5,339 Lowe Inlet System 35,000 5,139 Quitonsta Creek 15,000 4,047 Devon Lake System 15,000 3,641 Kingkown Inlet System 15,000 3,258 Diana Creek 10,000 2,664 Keecha Creek 15,000 2,602 Mikado Lake System 5,500 2,380 Kooryet Creek 15,000 2,290 Shawatlan Creek 6,000 2,204 Tsimtack Lake System 10,000 2,072 Kitkiata Creek 5,800 1,847 End Hill Creek 7,500 1,703 Johnston Lake 8,000 1,703

3.1.2 Salmonids other than Pacific Salmon

Cutthroat Trout

Description Cutthroat adults can either adopt a resident freshwater form or an anadromous form that migrates to the ocean. Resident cutthroat trout can reach up to 76 cm in length and approximately 17 pounds. Anadromous “sea-run” cutthroat trout can be as large as 3.2 kg (Beere, pers. comm.).

Life Cycle Cutthroat trout typically migrate in late autumn and early winter to spawn between February and May. They may be repeat spawners (Behnke 1992). Spawning takes place in the gravel of small Page 12

streams and fry generally emerge around April in coastal populations. Anadromous migration usually occurs in the spring and may coincide with that of Pacific salmon. Sea-run cutthroat trout attain a maximum age of about 10 years (Behnke 1992), usually remain in the estuaries within the influence of the river, and may move in and out of freshwater in spring to feed on migrating salmon smolts.

Status On the North Coast, cutthroat trout are known to inhabit 120 different streams. They have recreational fishing potential and have been documented in 14 different lakes in the NC LRMP area. Sizes recorded from lake sampling ranged from 266 mm to 470 mm in fork length. The largest cutthroat recorded was found in Triumph Lake and weighed 1090 g (Mason 1998). Nine streams (Captain Cove Creek, Denise Creek, Ecstall River, Khutzeymateen River, Lachmach River, McNichol Creek, Pa-aat River, Quitonsta Creek and Silver Creek) are known to have anadromous cutthroat, however, little data have been recorded about these fish. These populations have been designated as potentially unique (Appendix V)

Cutthroat trout are blue listed in BC through the Conservation Data Centre, which means they are vulnerable.

Rainbow Trout or Steelhead

Description Similar to cutthroat trout, rainbow trout also have a resident freshwater form and an anadromous form called steelhead. Rainbows typically become mature around age 3-5. Steelhead usually return to spawn in freshwater after spending 1 to 4 years in the ocean. They may spawn repeatedly in freshwater and have multiple ocean migrations. Steelhead may live up to 8 years, reach lengths over 100 cm and weigh up to 19 kg (Scott and Crossman 1973).

Life Cycle Both resident rainbow trout and steelhead spawn in the spring, from mid April to late June. Steelhead are often divided into “summer run” and “winter run” depending on the time they spend in freshwater. Summer-run steelhead usually migrate to freshwater in the summer, approximately 9- 12 months prior to spawning, whereas winter-run steelhead migrate in the late fall to winter, approximately 3-4 months prior to spawning. Steelhead spawn in mainstem rivers or tributaries, whereas lake dwelling resident rainbow trout spawn in inlet and outlet streams of their lakes. Emergence of fry usually occurs in mid-June to mid-August, and juveniles may spend up to three years in streams prior to smolting if they become steelhead, or migrating to a lake if they become lake residents. Other rainbow trout may inhabit the stream for their entire lives.

Status On the North Coast, rainbow trout have been identified in 79 streams and steelhead are known to inhabit 69 different streams. Both of these fish have recreational fishing potential. In particular, a population of rainbow trout exists in Union Lake that grows to weights of 1.8 kg (Mason and Lewis 1997) and a population in Khtada Lake that grows up to weights of 6 kg (FISS 2003). Streams with steelhead are of great importance for recreational fishing, and in particular, summer-run steelhead are of importance to fishers.

A number of North Coast stocks are likely quite small and would potentially be vulnerable to overfishing. Page 13

Dolly Varden

Description Dolly Varden may also adopt a freshwater (resident) or anadromous form. On the North Coast, resident Dolly Varden can grow up to 330 mm and weigh up to 450 grams.

Life Cycle Both anadromous and resident forms spawn in freshwater streams in the fall, between September and early November, and may repeat spawn in multiple years (Scott and Crossman 1973). Mature adults are usually 3-6 years old, and spawn in rivers of moderate current with a bottom of medium to large gravel. Eggs hatch in March or April and emerge in late April to mid May. Anadromous forms migrate to the ocean in late May to early June and generally spend time near the river mouths in tidal water. Resident forms disperse but remain in their spawning streams.

Status On the North Coast, Dolly Varden char are widespread and are known to inhabit 172 different streams. Although they also adopt an anadromous form, there is only record of this form in the Lachmach River. Dolly Varden have recreational fishing potential and have been documented in at least 17 different lakes in the NC LRMP area (Mason 1998, Mason and Lewis 1997, Mason et al. 1997, Mason and Williams 1998), although they are likely present in many more lakes. Recorded sizes range from 177 to 337 mm in fork length in these lakes. The largest Dolly Varden recorded was captured in Lowe Lake and weighed 458 g.

Dolly Varden are blue listed in BC through the Conservation Data Centre, which means they are vulnerable.

Bull Trout

Description Bull trout have a similar life cycle to Dolly Varden, and are suspected to have both anadromous and freshwater forms. On the North Coast, bull trout presence is not documented, however they can grow up to 755 mm and weigh 3.8 kg in the Morice River watershed (Bahr, 2002).

Life Cycle Bull trout usually mature between the ages of 4 and 7 and spawn in the fall, often in mid September. They begin migrations to the spawning grounds as early as June and as late as early September. Bull trout spawn in cold water in the upper headwaters of tributary systems, and often navigate barriers to get to their spawning locations. Eggs incubate over the winter, and emerge in the spring. Juvenile fish spend the first 1-2 years in their natal streams, but may then migrate to a larger mainstem. Other forms may remain in their natal streams for their entire lives, or migrate to the ocean if they adopt an anadromous life history strategy.

Status There are no records of bull trout in streams within the NC LRMP area, however they are easily misidentified as Dolly Varden. The lack of recorded data is likely the result of low sampling effort and probably does not reflect the species distribution in the area.

Bull trout are blue listed in BC through the Conservation Data Centre, which means they are vulnerable. Bull trout are also an Identified Wildlife under the Forest Practices Code (now the

Page 14

Forest and Range Practices Act). This means that their habitat may require special management attention during forest and range operational planning or higher level planning.

3.1.3 Eulachon

Description Eulachon adults typically grow to about 203 mm (8 inches), weigh 40-60 grams and generally spawn after their third year of life. Eulachon are a species of concern in British Columbia and are blue listed. On the North Coast, eulachon are found in the Nass, Skeena, Ecstall, Khyex, Kasiks and Gitnadoix rivers, as well as Scotia and Khtada Creeks (Stoffels, 2001). They may have also occurred in the Quaal River (Chris Picard, Pers.Com.).

Life cycle Eulachon are anadromous fish that spawn in freshwater and spend the remainder of their life in the ocean. Adults broadcast spawn in coastal rivers between mid-March and mid-May and the eggs stick to sand grains in the river bottom. They hatch in 2 to 8 weeks and larvae immediately drift passively downstream to the ocean. It is not known whether eulachon die after spawning.

Status Little is recorded about the status of eulachon on the North Coast. Eulachon are found in the lower Skeena and its tributaries, the Ecstall, Khyex, Scotia and Khtada, as well as the lower Nass River (Stoffels 2001). The oil from eulachon is used to make grease and is of cultural importance to First Nations people. In recent years, eulachon have declined throughout their range (Lewis 2001), and a sharp decline occurred in 1994. Rivers also had decreased eulachon runs in 1999 and 2000. The declines are unclear and speculative, but possible explanations affecting populations include directed fisheries, bycatch in marine trawling, marine mammal or forage fish predation, contamination by industry, debris from log handling, shoreline construction or dikes, changes in ocean temperature and changes in the volume and discharge patterns of rivers draining forested areas. Historically there has been no active management of eulachon in BC (DFO 1999, 2000a) and few scientific and technical studies have been conducted. However, the Eulachon Research Council is an ad hoc group that has been meeting since 1995 to address the research needs related to eulachon (Stoffels 2001).

Eulachon are a blue listed species in BC through the Conservation Data Centre, which means they are vulnerable.

3.1.4 Sticklebacks

Description The most common stickleback on the North Coast is the Threespine Stickleback. There are both marine and freshwater forms of sticklebacks. Sticklebacks can grow up to 4 inches in length, but are usually 35-55 mm after their third year (Scott and Crossman 1973).

Life Cycle Sexual maturity is attained in the first year of life and spawning takes place in the summer, generally in June and July. Sticklebacks build barrel shaped, hollow nests composed of small twigs and plant debris that have circular openings at each end for the deposition of eggs. The freshwater form of the

Page 15

threespine stickleback (G. aculeatus leiurus) prefers to build its nest on a sandy bottom in shallow water. Eggs hatch in approximately 7 days and are guarded by the male until the new fish become independent. The marine form (G. aculeatus trachurus) commonly schools in the eelgrass around harbours where the water is brackish, but is also found in the open ocean. It is also known to breed in salt water.

Status Threespine sticklebacks are found in at least 54 streams within the North Coast LRMP area, and are likely widespread. They have been recorded up to 95 mm in length with weights of 4.6 grams (Mason 1998).

3.1.5 Sculpins

Description The most common sculpins on the North Coast are the coastrange sculpin, the prickly sculpin and the slimy sculpin. They grow up to 7 inches, but are typically around 4 to 5 inches in length.

Life Cycle All three sculpin species have similar reproductive strategies. Mature adults spawn in spring, anytime after mid March. They spawn in freshwater but can tolerate brackish water. Eggs are deposited in a mass on the ceiling of a nest usually underneath a rock. Eggs hatch within approximately 15-16 days, and the young live in the water column for the first 30-35 days after hatching, prior to metamorphosing and remaining on the bottom.

Status Prickly sculpin has been recorded in 27 different streams on the North Coast. Slimy sculpin has been recorded in 3 streams, and coastrange sculpin has been recorded in 6 streams. These fish are not important for recreational fishing.

3.1.6 Mountain Whitefish

Description Mountain whitefish adults remain in freshwater for their entire lives, can grow up to 570 mm and can weigh up to four pounds.

Life Cycle Mountain whitefish reach sexual maturity at age 3 or 4, however, they can live to be up to 17 years old. Broadcast spawning occurs in the late fall or early winter over gravel and eggs hatch in early spring. These fish inhabit lakes and larger rivers, are primarily bottom feeders, but will feed on midwater plankton and surface insects if necessary. Status Very little is known about mountain whitefish on the North Coast, and they are only recorded in the Ecstall River (FISS 2003).

Page 16

3.1.7 Lamprey

Description The Pacific lamprey and the river lamprey can be found on the North Coast. The Pacific lamprey grows to approximately 680 mm whereas the river lamprey is much smaller, growing to 311 mm. They are both parasitic and anadromous.

Life Cycle Very little is known about the river lamprey, except that they spawn in freshwater and may make long migrations to do so. Pacific lampreys migrate to freshwater to spawn between July and September, and spend the winter months until the following March becoming sexually mature. They spawn from April to July in sandy gravel and usually die between 1 and 14 days after spawning.

Status Few streams have recorded data on lamprey in the North Coast, however the river lamprey has been recorded in Kitkiata Creek and the Pacific lamprey can be found in Kitkiata Creek, and both the Goat and Lachmach rivers.

3.2 Escapement Trends of Pacific Salmon based on DFO Escapement data

The following section provides the analysis of escapement trends of Pacific salmon in the LRMP study area. As noted previously in this report, this is a preliminary analysis based solely on the available data and is not intended to be a comprehensive assessment of escapement trends.

3.2.1 Chinook Salmon

A summary of chinook salmon stock status is presented in Table 8 and escapement data are included in Appendix I. Of the 16 known chinook stocks, 18.8% (n= 3) are identified as of some concern and 75 % (n=12) are identified as potentially threatened. Streams with abundant escapement appear to have declined less than streams with sparse escapement. Each of the top 4 chinook streams (based on historical average escapement) are potentially threatened (Ecstall River, Johnston River, Kwinamass River, Khutzeymateen River) and these streams all have current escapements less than 40% of their historical means. In addition to these, other notable chinook stocks in apparent decline include:

• Georgie River, at 0% of its historical escapement • Chambers Creek, at 1% of its historical escapement • Kitsault River, at 14% of its historical escapement • Kloiya River, at 51% of its historical escapement

Page 17

Table 8. Summary of escapement data for chinook salmon from 1950-2001.

Chinook Salmon % of Total Stock Status Total Stocks Unthreatened1 0 0.0% Of Some Concern2 3 18.8% Small stock--apparently stable (S-1) 3 18.8% Historically large popn--now depleted. (S-3) 0 0.0% Potentially Threatened 12 75.0% Potential High Risk of Extinction (H) 9 56.3% Potential Moderate Risk of Extinction (M) 3 18.8% 3 No Recent Records 1 6.3% Total Known Chinook Stocks 16 Questionable stocks4 4 Total Chinook Streams 20 1Unthreatened stocks are at low risk of extinction 2Of Some Concern are not at immediate risk of extinction 3No Recent Records: No records from 1990-2001 4Questionable stocks have fewer than 4 annual records of 25 or more spawners

3.2.2 Chum Salmon

A summary of chum salmon stock status is presented in Table 9 and escapement data are included in Appendix I. Of the 110 known chum stocks, 14.5% (n= 16) are identified as unthreatened, 10.9 % (n=12) are identified as of some concern and 74.5% (n=82) are identified as potentially threatened. Streams with abundant escapement appear to have declined less than streams with sparse escapement. Of the top 10 chum stocks (based on historical average escapement), 6 are identified as unthreatened (Ecstall River, Stagoo Creek, Kshwan River, Khutzeymateen River, Kitsault River, and Illiance River). 52 of the 104 stocks identified as threatened have average escapements of less than 500 spawners. Some of the notable chum stocks in apparent decline include:

• Kiltuish River, at 15% of its historical average escapement • Turn Creek, at 8% of its historical average escapement • Kingkown Inlet System, at 2% of its historical average escapement • Kwinamass River, at 3% of its historical average escapement • Stannard Creek, at 11% of its historical average escapement • Georgie River, at 9% of its historical average escapement

Page 18

Table 9. Summary of escapement data for chum salmon from 1950-2001.

Chum Salmon % of Total Stock Status Total Stocks Unthreatened1 16 14.5% Of Some Concern2 12 10.9% Small stock--apparently stable (S-1) 9 8.2% Historically large popn--now depleted. (S-3) 3 2.7% Potentially Threatened 82 74.5% Potential High Risk of Extinction (H) 62 56.4% Potential Moderate Risk of Extinction (M) 20 18.2% No Recent Records3 0 0.0% Total Known Chum Stocks 110 Questionable stocks4 27 Total Chum Streams 137 1Unthreatened stocks are at low risk of extinction 2Of Some Concern are not at immediate risk of extinction 3No Recent Records: No records from 1990-2001 4Questionable stocks have fewer than 4 annual records of 25 or more spawners

3.2.3 Coho Salmon

A summary of coho salmon stock status is presented in Table 10 and escapement data are included in Appendix I. Of the 129 known coho stocks, 10.1% (n=13) are identified as unthreatened, 8.5% (n=11) are identified as of some concern and 76 % (n=98) are identified as potentially threatened. Eight of the top 11 coho producing streams (based on historical average escapement) are threatened (Kingkown Inlet System, Lowe Inlet System, Quitonsta Creek, Eagle Creek, End Hill Creek, Clifford Creek, Salmon Creek and Stannard Creek) and these streams all have current escapements less than 16% of their historical means. On the other hand, both the Khutzeymateen and Ecstall rivers are unthreatened and mean escapements in the 1990s were 265% and 401% of the historical mean escapement. Even so, some of the notable coho stocks are in apparent decline and include:

• Clifford Creek, at 0% of its historical mean escapement • Salmon Creek, at 0% of its historical mean escapement • Georgie River, at 0% of its historical mean escapement • Eagle Creek, at 1% of its historical mean escapement • Kingkown Inlet System, at 3% of its historical mean escapement • Stannard Creek, at 7% of its historical mean escapement • End Hill Creek, at 9% of its historical mean escapement

Page 19

Table 10. Summary of escapement data for coho salmon from 1950-2001.

Coho Salmon % of Total Stock Status Total Stocks Unthreatened1 13 10.1% Of Some Concern2 11 8.5% Small stock--apparently stable (S-1) 10 7.8% Historically large popn--now depleted. (S-3) 1 0.8% Potentially Threatened 98 76.0% Potential High Risk of Extinction (H) 86 66.7% Potential Moderate Risk of Extinction (M) 12 9.3% No Recent Records3 7 5.4% Total Known Coho Stocks 129 Questionable stocks4 22 Total Coho Streams 151 1Unthreatened stocks are at low risk of extinction 2Of Some Concern are not at immediate risk of extinction 3No Recent Records: No records from 1990-2001 4Questionable stocks have fewer than 4 annual records of 25 or more spawners

3.2.4 Pink Salmon

A summary of pink salmon stock status is presented in Table 11 and escapement data are included in Appendix I. Of the 154 known pink stocks, 66.9% (n=103) are identified as unthreatened, 5.8% (n=9) are identified as of some concern and 27.3 % (n=42) are identified as threatened. Fourteen of the top 15 pink producing streams (based on historical average escapement) are unthreatened (Quaal, Kwinamass, Khutzeymateen, Oona, Ensheshese and Khyex rivers, Moore Cove, Kitkiata, Kumealon, Dogfish Bay, La Hou, Turn, Borrowman and Head Creeks), and 10 of these systems have means in the 1990s greater than 100% of their historical means (1950-1989). Many pink stocks have abundant escapements and of all the pink stocks, 79 (48%) have means in the 1990s greater than 100% of their historical means. Although most pink streams are unthreatened, there are some notable streams that have been declining and are of some concern, including:

• Kiltuish River at 22% of its historical mean escapement • Kiskosh Creek, at 46% of its historical mean escapement • Kdelmashan Creek, at 16% of its historical mean escapement • Scotia River, at 18% of its historical mean escapement • Kingkown Inlet System, at 1% of its historical mean escapement

Page 20

Table 11. Summary of escapement data for pink salmon from 1950-2001.

Pink Salmon % of Total Stock Status Total Stocks Unthreatened1 103 66.9% Of Some Concern2 9 5.8% Small stock--apparently stable (S-1) 4 2.6% Historically large popn--now depleted. (S-3) 5 3.2% Potentially Threatened 42 27.3% Potential High Risk of Extinction (H) 26 16.9% Potential Moderate Risk of Extinction (M) 16 10.4% No Recent Records3 0 0.0% Total Known Pink Stocks 154 Questionable stocks4 10 Total Pink Streams 164 1Unthreatened stocks are at low risk of extinction 2Of Some Concern are not at immediate risk of extinction 3No Recent Records: No records from 1990-2001 4Questionable stocks have fewer than 4 annual records of 25 or more spawners

3.2.5 Sockeye Salmon

A summary of sockeye salmon stock status is presented in Table 12 and escapement data are included in Appendix I. Of the 48 known sockeye stocks, 29.2% (n=14) are identified as unthreatened, 4.2% (n=2) are identified as of some concern and 62.5% (n=30) are identified as potentially threatened. Eight of the top 10 sockeye producing streams (based on historical average escapement) are unthreatened (Devon Lake System, Mikado Lake System, Kingkown Inlet System, and Diana, Keecha, Shawatlan, Kooryet and Curtis Inlet creeks). As well, three runs of sockeye have increased in the 1990s; the Mikado Lake System at 114% of historical mean, Tsimtack Creek at 124% of historical mean and Johnston Lake at 324% of its historical mean. However, there are some notable streams that have been declining and are of concern or threatened, including:

• Lowe Inlet System, at 42% of its historical mean escapement • Quitonsta Creek, at 39% of its historical mean escapement • Kitkiata Creek, at 43% of its historical mean escapement • End Hill Creek, at 4% of its historical mean escapement • Cridge Inlet Creek, at 0% of its historical mean escapement

Page 21

Table 12. Summary of escapement data for sockeye salmon from 1950-2001.

Sockeye Salmon % of Total Stock Status Total Stocks Unthreatened1 14 29.2% Of Some Concern2 2 4.2% Small stock--apparently stable (S-1) 0 0.0% Historically large popn--now depleted. (S-3) 2 4.2% Potentially Threatened 30 62.5% Potential High Risk of Extinction (H) 27 56.3% Potential Moderate Risk of Extinction (M) 3 6.3% No Recent Records3 2 4.2% Total Known Sockeye Stocks 48 Questionable stocks4 23 Total Sockeye Streams 71 1Unthreatened stocks are at low risk of extinction 2Of Some Concern are not at immediate risk of extinction 3No Recent Records: No records from 1990-2001 4Questionable stocks have fewer than 4 annual records of 25 or more spawners

3.2.6 Summary of Escapement Trends for Pacific Salmon

DFO’s salmon escapement data have documented 543 individual stocks of salmon in the North Coast LRMP area (Table 13). Although a number of concerns exist about consistency of data collection for each of these stocks, it is apparent that spawning populations of all species are in decline. Nearly 50% of these stocks are classified as potentially threatened (High or Moderate risk) while only 26.9% of stocks are classified as Unthreatened.

Table 13: Summary of Escapement Trends for Salmon in the NC LRMP Area. Potentially Of Some Concern Threatened

k, k

d e oc now

,

st l abl n y nt l ) te Ris Species s Total on nt d istorically ed mal latio re et e dera (s (h Rece opu Unthreatene S-1 appa stable) S-3 larg p depl High Risk Mo No Recor Questi Stock Chinook 0 3 0 9 3 1 4 20 Chum 16 9 3 62 20 0 27 137 Coho 13 10 1 86 12 7 22 151 Pink 103 4 5 26 16 1 9 164 Sockeye 14 0 2 27 3 2 23 71 Total 146 26 11 210 54 11 85 543 % of all stocks 26.9% 4.8% 2.0% 38.7% 9.9% 2.0% 15.7% Page 22

Stock decline appears to be consistent across the study area. Only 26 of the 167 identified salmon producing streams do not have any salmon stocks identified as “Potentially Threatened” or “Of Some Concern”. Most of these 26 streams sustain small populations. These streams are listed separately in Appendix IV. Conversely, 141 of the 167 salmon producing streams have stocks that are identified as “Threatened” or “Of Some Concern”.

No ready explanation of why such a large number of stocks are in decline is available at this time. While impacts from historical land use practices may have contributed to some stock decline, many of the watersheds that have stocks in decline have minimal or no development. A more detailed analysis of what may be leading to this stock decline is recommended.

Slaney et al (1996) undertook a comprehensive assessment of anadromous salmon and trout escapement for all stocks in BC and the Yukon (n= 9,662). Stocks were identified in categories similar to Morrel as outlined in the following table:

Table 14: Comparison of Escapement Evaluation Methods between Slaney (1996) and Morrel (2000). Category Slaney et al (1996) Morrel (2000)

Extinct Referral to local experts Not included

High Risk Mean population in the current decade was Mean population in the current decade was less less than 20% of the long term mean and than 20% of the long term mean and less than 200 less than 200 fish. fish. Or, Mean population in the current decade was less than 50% of the long term mean, and less than 50 fish (pink, sockeye) or 25 fish (chinook, coho, chum) Moderate Risk Large populations exhibiting declines to Mean population in the current decade is between 200-1000 fish from a long term mean of 20% and 50% of the long term mean and less than more than 5000 fish or, or equal to 1000 fish or Small populations reduced to less than 20% Mean population in the current decade is less than of a long term mean of 1,000 to 5,000 fish. 20% of the long term mean and between 200 and 1000 fish. Special Concern Stocks could be threatened by relatively Historically small stock, mean escapement in the minor disturbances, especially where a current decade is less than 200 fish and >50% of pending threat is known or, the long term mean. Have insufficient information on population Historically large stock, depleted to <20% of long trends, but available information suggests term average and mean escapement in the current depletion or, decade is >1000 fish May interbreed with introduced, non native fish, or Are not currently at risk but require attention because of unique characterisitics Unthreatened Stocks averaging more than 1,000 fish or Mean escapement in the current decade is 200 or greater than 20% of their long term mean more fish and >50% of the long term mean. abundance. Unknown Not defined Insufficient data to determine status. No evidence of depletion. No recent records, - may be extinct. May not correspond to distinct stock. Page 23

The above table notes that the methods used in this report are similar in identifying stocks at moderate to high risk, but use different criteria for stocks that may be unthreatened or of some concern. Also, the criteria for Slaney et al (1996) unknown stocks is not defined, and as outlined below, this category accounted for almost half of their identified stocks in the North Coast.

Slaney et al (1996) identified 584 stocks on the North Coast (the geographic boundaries are not clearly defined and may be slightly different than the LRMP boundaries), compared to the 543 stocks included in this report. The following table compares the results of the Slaney et al (1996) stock evaluation to the evaluation in this report:

Table 15: Comparison of Stock Assessment Results with Slaney et al (1996). Extinct High Moderate Special Unthreatened Unknown Total Risk Risk Concern

Slaney et al 0 41 5 0 267 271 584 (1996) 0% 7.0% 0.9% 0% 45.7% 46.4% Gordon and n/a 210 54 37 146 96 543 Bahr (2003) 38.7% 9.9% 6.8% 24.6% 17.7%

The different criteria used for Unthreatened and Unknown stocks makes comparison of the 2 studies difficult at this time. The large number of unknown stocks in the Slaney et al report appear to be turning up as stocks that are at High Risk, Moderate Risk or Of Special Concern in this analysis. Further analysis of the original data sets (to compare stream by stream results) would be required to clearly identify how the escapement trend on the North Coast have evolved in the years between these assessments.

The apparent sharp decline in stocks over the past decade is an issue that requires further assessment to confirm whether the data reflects actual conditions in the streams.

3.3 Summary of Freshwater (non Pacific salmon) Information, and watersheds with unique or vulnerable fish values.

The information on freshwater species in the North Coast LRMP area comes from a wide variety of sources, and has been compiled to note fish presence in a stream. The information in the database reflects available information about freshwater fish, and absence of data does not necessarily reflect a lack of fish presence, but rather a lack of knowledge about the presence of that fish.

Dolly Varden char, and cutthroat trout are the most widely distributed species on the North Coast. 263 streams are listed in the database of which 117 (44.5%) are known to have cutthroat trout, and 172 (57%) are known to have Dolly Varden. Number of stocks documented for other species in the North Coast LRMP area is given in Table 14. Although cutthroat trout and Dolly Varden appear to be widespread in streams on the North Coast, we have less knowledge about anadromous forms

Page 24

of these two species, and have no record of bull trout. This lack of information probably reflects a small amount of sampling effort and not the abundance of the species in this area.

Table 16. List of freshwater fish species and their presence in North Coast streams. Fish Species # documented stocks cutthroat trout 117 anadromous cutthroat trout 9 Dolly Varden 150 anadromous Dolly Varden 1 rainbow trout 68 steelhead 61 kokanee 19 eulachon 3 mountain whitefish 1 threespine stickleback 42 prickly sculpin 24 coastrange sculpin 5 slimy sculpin 3 sculpin (General) 40 river lamprey 1 Pacific lamprey 3 lamprey (General) 3 stickleback (General) 19 western brook lamprey 0 green sturgeon 0 shad (introduced) 0 peamouth chub 0 northern pikeminnow 0 longnose dace 0 redside shiner 0 longnose sucker 0 largescale sucker 0 rainbow smelt 0 longfin smelt 0 Pacific staghorn sculpin 0 starry flounder (estuary) 0 Atlantic salmon 0 burbot 0 northern redbelly dace 0 pygmy whitefish 0

The freshwater database also includes information about a stream or fish stocks’ recreational value, its potential vulnerability and its potential uniqueness. Most of this information came from stakeholder input and from MELP’s Rich Ecosystem Analysis (Liepins, undated), and not from inventories or scientific studies. The criteria for determining recreational value, vulnerability and

Page 25

uniqueness are not scientifically defined. Further studies for site specific development issues may be needed to determine actual or relative recreational value, vulnerability and uniqueness.

Some freshwater fish species such as rainbow and cutthroat trout, and steelhead have been identified as important for recreational angling. In particular, steelhead were regarded as very important for recreational fishing and streams known to contain them have been identified as potentially unique. Some steelhead streams were also identified as potentially vulnerable, mainly due to their easy access – small populations are vulnerable to over fishing. Other potentially vulnerable streams include those with karst topography that may be sensitive to ground disturbance. Eulachon were also identified as unique because of their cultural significance to native people. Other streams have recreation potential for fish viewing or guiding. Of the data available, 64 streams are identified as potentially unique, 14 are potentially important for recreation and 5 are potentially vulnerable. A list of these streams identified as unique, vulnerable or having recreation potential is given in Appendix V.

Some lakes within the North Coast area are also suspected to have unique populations of freshwater fish. Khtada Lake appears to have a unique population of rainbow trout that have been reported up to weights of 6 kg (FISS 2003). There is a genetic study underway on rainbow trout in Khtada Lake, however it is still incomplete at this time (Heath, pers. comm.). Union Lake also has large rainbow trout, reported to have weights up to 1.9 kg (Mason and Lewis 1997). Lowe Lake has populations of cutthroat trout that weigh up to 690 g and Dolly Varden that weigh up to 458 g that may be of interest to recreational anglers (Mason and Williams 1998). Similar fish values may exist in other lakes, but have not yet been identified.

3.4 Review of Community Collected Rearing Data (Proctor, 2003)

The North Coast LRMP Fish and Wildlife sector requested that community collected coho rearing data be included in this background report. As such, local resident Bart Proctor, through the North Coast Community Fisheries Centre, completed a report on juvenile coho utilization of streams within the LRMP area. A complete copy of this report entitled The Ranking of North Coast Coho Stream for Rearing Productivity and Biodiversity: A supplementary Fisheries Report for the North Coast LRMP has been circulated previously by the GTT. This report was meant to supplement the fisheries data being used to evaluate productive streams in the plan area, particularly for coho salmon as enumeration of coho stocks is often confounded by weather and field conditions. Proctor’s report included data from juvenile coho synoptic programs from 1998-2001 for 79 streams. These data were collected through contracts managed by the Community Fisheries Development Centre during the North Coast Stream Inventory Program, as well as the Oona River Stream Inventory Program and the Fisheries Charter Vessels Survey Program. Proctor evaluated coho productivity in streams with an Overall Index of Rearing Productivity from 1-3 (low=1, medium=2 or high=3) based on catch per unit effort and density of juvenile fish in selected sampling sites. Streams were then grouped geographically and their productivity indexes averaged to indicate the areas with the highest productivity.

The top three areas for rearing coho salmon were identified as the lower Skeena, Grenville and Kincolith. Streams in the lower Skeena area include Kwinitsa, Antigonish, Aberdeen, Marigonish, Inver, Basalt, Stapledon, and Valley (Khyex). Proctor hypothesizes that streams in the lower Skeena serve as a temporary refuge area for out-migrating coho juveniles prior to them entering the Page 26

ocean. The Grenville area also includes streams near the mouth of the Skeena River and the Kincolith area includes streams near the mouth of the Nass River.

3.5 Summary of Existing Legislation, Policy and Guidebooks

Fisheries Act

The Fisheries Act is administered by the federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). Habitat management staff in the department have responsibility for protecting fish and fish habitat under the habitat provisions of the Fisheries Act. The Act contains definitions of terms including: fish, deleterious substance, deposit, fish habitat, etc.. The portion of the act most applicable to land and resource management are sections 34 to 43 which govern Fish Habitat Protection and Pollution Prevention. Key provisions of these sections include:

• S. 35(1): No person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat. • S. 35(2): The minister may authorize harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat (sic). • S. 36(3): No person shall deposit or permit the deposit of a deleterious substance of any type in water frequented by fish. (note: this includes sediment) • S. 37(1): Requires the proponent of an activity that may harmfully alter, disrupt or destroy fish habitat to undertake appropriate studies to assess for and mitigate potential impacts. (ie., proponent pays) • S. 37(2): Allows the minister to require plan modifications, and/or restrict the operation of the undertaking. • S. 40: Prescribes fines up to $1,000,000 and/or up to 3 years in jail for offences committed under the act.

While the Fisheries Act provides specific legislation to protect fish habitat, a number of DFO papers have been published that provide direction to the public and to DFO’s habitat staff on how to interpret the Act. The most important of these is The Department of Fisheries and Oceans Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat (DFO, 1986). This document sets out the Department’s policy objective of a Net Gain of Habitat, and the guiding principle of No Net Loss of the Productive Capacity of Habitats. To clarify aspects of this Policy, DFO published the Habitat Conservation and Protection Guidelines (2nd Edition, 1998). This document provides direction to DFO Habitat staff and proponents on the processes by which projects may meet the guiding principle of No Net Loss.

In recent years, DFO Habitat staff have taken a precautionary approach in their review of projects that could affect fish habitat. Projects that have the potential to harmfully affect fish habitat are generally subject to a review process whereby DFO requires the proponent to relocate and/or redesign their project and develop mitigation strategies to avoid impacts to fish habitat. Where unavoidable losses may still occur, DFO may choose not to authorize the alterations to fish habitat, or to authorize them with specific conditions such as the creation of compensation habitat, and the monitoring of project impacts and the effects of compensation. Proponents do not require DFO authorizations to harmfully affect fish habitat, however they are at risk to prosecution under the Fisheries Act if fish habitat is harmfully affected without receiving an authorization in advance.

Page 27

The substantial fines and potential jail time associated with the Fisheries Act is a powerful motivator for land developers to seek advice from DFO Habitat staff prior to proceeding with projects that could affect fish habitat.

Projects identified as potentially causing a harmful alteration, disruption or disturbance of fish habitat are required to undergo a review under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA)

The CEAA establishes a process for conducting environmental assessments of projects that involve the federal government, and ensures that environmental effects are considered in the planning stage, including cumulative effects. Projects that may affect fish habitat trigger a CEAA assessment. Projects with relatively minor effects typically receive a CEAA screening review, while projects with potentially more significant effects may require a much more detailed review. Both types of reviews require referral to other federal agencies (Canadian Wildlife Service, Coast Guard), stakeholders and First Nations, and provide opportunities for public input.

Species at Risk Legislation

Both federal and provincial government manage the status of species at risk. At the federal level, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) assesses and designates which wild species are in some danger of disappearing from Canada. Under the National Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk, federal, provincial and territorial governments have agreed to recognise COSEWIC as a source of independent advice on the national status of species at risk and have agreed to work together to protect these species. COSEWIC designations are also accepted under the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) which was passed into law on December 12, 2002 and came into effect in July 2003. SARA is designed to prevent Canadian indigenous species, subspecies and distinct populations of wildlife from becoming extirpated or extinct, to provide for the recovery of endangered or threatened species, and to encourage the management of other species to prevent them from becoming at risk. Both SARA and the National Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk are components of the federal government’s Strategy for the Protection of Species at Risk.

At the provincial level, British Columbia is committed to the National Accord policy and also maintains a provincial “red” and “blue” list of species grouped according to their conservation risk. Red listed species are species or subspecies that have, or are candidates for Extirpated, Endangered or Threatened status in British Columbia. Blue listed species are vulnerable taxa of special concern because of characteristics that make them particularly sensitive to human activities or natural events. They are at risk, but are not Extirpated, Endangered or Threatened. The provincial status given to a species is dependent on the ranking assigned to it on a subnational (provincial or territorial) level by an independent, non-profit organization called NatureServe. NatureServe scientists rank each species on a Global and Subnational scale based on scientific research and expertise of their members. The Conservation Data Centre manages all of these designations and reports them for four fish species at risk on the North Coast, as found below in Table 1. COSEWIC has not applied designations to any of these fish species at the present time, therefore they are not protected by SARA.

Page 28

Table 17. Fish species at risk on the North Coast with their NatureServe and BC Status designations. Explanations of the rankings are given below the table. NatureServe Scientific Name English Name G Rank Subnational BC Status Oncorhynchus clarki clarki Cutthroat Trout, clarki subspecies G4T4 S3S4SE BLUE Salvelinus confluentus Bull Trout G3 S3 BLUE Salvelinus malma Dolly Varden G5 S3S4 BLUE Thaleichthys pacificus Eulachon G5 S2S3 BLUE G: Global--Applies to a species over its entire range; T: Infraspecific Taxon--The status of infraspecific taxa (subspecies or varieties) S: Subnational--Applies to species conservation status in British Columbia SE: Exotic--An exotic established in the nation or subnation; may be native in nearby regions 1 = critically imperilled; 2 = imperiled; 3 = vulnerable to extirpation or extinction; 4 = apparently secure; 5 = demonstrably widespread, abundant, and secure.

The blue list is designed to emphasize species that require special attention, therefore assisting in prioritization of research, inventory, and management which will facilitate conservation and appropriate land-use decisions. For example, bull trout have been selected as part of the Identified Wildlife list which receives further attention in the Identified Wildlife Management Strategy, a component of the Forest Practices Code.

Through this initiative, areas of limiting habitat called wildlife habitat areas (WHAs) can be mapped and approved by the Chief Forester and Deputy Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection (WLAP). WHAs are managed according to general wildlife measures (GWMs) specific to the habitat requirements of the species. In the case of bull trout, WHAs are intended to retain functioning riparian areas around critical habitats, maintain stream channel integrity, groundwater flow and natural temperature regimes. Although the infrastructure is in place, there are no WHAs for bull trout at the present time in the North Coast. Cutthroat trout, Dolly Varden and eulachon are not part of the Identified Wildlife list, therefore their presence on the blue list allows them to be considered for more formal designation as Endangered or Threatened either under the British Columbia Wildlife Act or COSEWIC.

Forest Practices Code

Legislation governing forestry practices is currently in transition from the Forest Practices Code Act to the Forest and Range Practice Act (FRPA). The Forests Statutes Amendment Act (No. 2) 2002 (FSAA) was given Royal Assent on November 26, 2002 and makes amendments to the existing Forest Practices Code. These amendments came into force on December 17, 2002 and were intended to provide some immediate efficiencies and streamlining in planning and practices.

The Forest and Range Practices Act (FRPA)--expected to come into force in April 2003--replaces the Forest Practices Code of BC Act and enacts a new forest and range management planning and practices framework. Associated regulations will be developed to support this legislation, and will come into force at the same time.

Legislation associated with fish habitat and riparian protection remains unchanged in the new act. Many aspects of this legislation are specifically designed to protect fish and fish habitat, but are too numerous to repeat in this document. Some of the most important regulations include:

Page 29

1. The Operational and Site Planning Regulations: • Defines terms such as: fish stream, stream, wetland, lake, riparian reserve zone, stream reach, fisheries and marine sensitive zones etc. • Part 8 – Riparian Management Areas: ! Division 1 – Streams, Division 2 – Wetlands, Division 3 – Lakes: Defines riparian classes and associated riparian reserve and management zones. 2. Timber Harvesting and Silviculture Practices Regulation • Part 3, Division 1: Harvesting on potentially unstable terrain. • Part 3, Division 2: Protection of Streams and Riparian Areas. 3. Forest Road Regulation • Part 3, Construction and Modification: Ensures timing windows and fish passage for construction and deactivation of crossings in fish streams

Perhaps the most important aspect of stream and riparian protection are the legislated requirements for riparian reserve and management zones around streams, lakes and wetlands. The designation of a reserve zone (no harvesting) maintains streamside timber and vegetation, vital for stabilizing banks, filtering sediments, providing shade and cover for fish and contributing litterfall and downed wood into channels. Current legislated reserve and management zones are shown in the following table: Table 18: Stream, Wetland and Lake Reserve and Management Zones Stream Reserve and Management Zones Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian Notes Class Reserve Management Management Zone (m) Zone* (m) Area (m) S1 50 20 70 Fish bearing, >20m wide S2 30 20 50 Fish bearing, >5, <20m wide S3 20 20 40 Fish bearing, >1.5, <5m wide S4 0 30 30 Fish bearing, <1.5m wide S5 0 30 30 Non-fish bearing, >3m wide S6 0 20 20 Non-fish bearing, <3m wide Large Streams 0 100 100 Channel width and active floodplain >100m wide * RMZ extends to the edge of any active floodplain Wetland Reserve and Management Zones W1 10 40 50 >5 ha W2* 10 20 30 >1, <5 ha, and in CWH very dry maritime, dry maritime or dry sub-maritime BGCZ W3 0 30 30 >1, <5 ha, and in BGCZ other than above. W4* 0 30 30 >0.5 ha, <1 ha, and in CWH very dry maritime, dry maritime or dry sub-maritime BGCZ W5 10 40 50 2 or more wetlands with overlapping riparian management areas that are >5ha.

Page 30

Lake Reserve and Management Zones Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian Notes Class Reserve Management Management Zone (m) Zone* (m) Area (m) L1 10 Established by >5ha in size* district manager L2* 10 20 30 >1, <5 ha, and in CWH very dry maritime, dry maritime or dry sub-maritime BGCZ L3 0 30 30 >1, <5 ha, and in BGCZ other than above. L4* 0 30 30 >0.5 ha, <1 ha, and in CWH very dry maritime, dry maritime or dry sub-maritime BGCZ *Lakes >1000 ha have no reserve zone * note: the BGC Zones for these classifications do not occur in the plan area.

Fish Stream Crossing Guidebook

Forest Practices Code guidebooks have been developed to support the regulations, but are not part of the legislation. The recommendations in guidebooks are not mandatory requirements, but once a recommended practice is included in a plan or prescription, it becomes legally enforceable.

The Fish Stream Crossing Guidebook (March 2002) was prepared under the direction of a multi- agency steering committee consisting of federal and provincial agency representatives and the forest industry representatives. It provides users with technical, statutory reference and process guidance for selecting and designing fish-stream crossings on forest, and mineral and petroleum access roads that should void harming fish habitat and provide fish passage at stream crossing sites.

This guidebook provides specific direction on:

• The provincial and federal review and approval process for crossing structures on fish streams, • Design and installation methods of various crossing structures, • Fish stream protection methods during installation and maintenance, and • Practices for deactivation of crossing structures.

The detailed content of the guidebook and the collaborative nature of its creation has made it an effective and well supported tool.

Fish Stream Identification Guidebook

The Fish Stream Identification Guidebook (2nd edition) provides specific details and examples of how streams, wetlands, lakes, and fisheries and marine sensitive zones are to be identified and classified in the field, and to be shown on planning maps. It also restates the specific regulations and definitions that govern stream identification.

Page 31

Riparian Management Area Guidebook

The Riparian Management Area Guidebook was provided to assist foresters in compliance with the Forest Practices Code of British Columbia Act and to set and achieve the management objectives for riparian management areas (RMA) specified in operational plans. The recommendations in the guidebooks are not mandatory, but once a recommended practice is included in a plan, prescription or contract, it becomes legally enforceable. In the absence of permits and plans, the guidelines outlined in the guidebook are used by government to assess riparian classification, management and mapping.

RMAs consist of a riparian management zone and a reserve zone if required. The widths of these zones are determined by attributes of streams, wetlands or lakes and adjacent terrestrial ecosystems. A summary of the riparian requirements for streams classified from S1-S6 under the Forest Practices Code can be found in Appendix III (Zielke and Bancroft, 2001).

Land Development Guidelines

The Land Development Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Habitat were produced in 1992 by the Habitat Management Division of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the Integrated Management Branch of the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks (now Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection). The purpose of these guidelines is to protect fish populations and their habitat from the damaging effects of land development activities. As per the guidebook, each land development project is subject to the following objectives:

• Provision and protection of leave strips adjacent to watercourses • Control of soil erosion and sediment in runoff water • Control of rates of water runoff to minimize impacts on watercourses • Control of instream work, construction and diversions on watercourses • Maintenance of fish passage in watercourses for all salmonid life stages • Prevention of the discharge of deleterious substances to watercourses

All new developments and expansions or re-developments of existing areas are considered land development projects and are subject to these guidelines unless they do not have fish habitat onsite or do not have any potential impact to fish habitat through construction activities, land use or stormwater discharges. Projects are referred to DFO and MWLAP for assessment of any proposed impact to the productive capacity of fish habitat. If an impact exists, options are examined to meet the no net loss criteria prior to project approval. Once approved, the project must follow the guidebook objectives and guidelines for construction in the following areas:

• Leave strips (typically 15 m from the high water mark on each side of the watercourse) • Erosion, sediment control and site development practices • Stormwater Management • Instream Work • Fish Passage and Culverts • Operating windows for fisheries sensitive zones

Page 32

Water Act

The Water Act is provincial legislation that regulates and licenses water use in BC. Of particular importance to land development are the requirements under Part 7 - Changes in and about a Stream. Proponents are required to seek and attain approval, licence or order for most types of changes in and about a stream. Exceptions include any changes made under the Forest Practices Code, or exceptions as listed in the Act.

Other Legislative Acts

There are a number of other legislative acts that may govern activities in and around streams under a variety of circumstances. These include:

Navigable Waters Protection Act: An act that regulates any activity in, around, under and over navigable waters (culverts, bridges, dredging, riprap placement)

Waste Management Act: An act that regulates discharge of all wastes into the environment.

Fish Protection Act: An act that protects fish habitat, particularly in urban areas where new or redeveloped industrial, commercial or residential developments take place beside streams.

Canadian Environmental Protection Act: An act designed to prevent pollution, to protect the environment and human health in order to contribute to sustainable development. It regulates the production and control of toxic substances.

3.6 Summary of Current Forestry Management Practices Adjacent to Streams and Riparian Areas

Forest harvest practices have changed substantially with the introduction of the Forest Practices Code, and the forest industry’s growing concern to be seen as good environmental stewards. Changes that affected streams and riparian areas included:

• Legislated reserve and management zones adjacent to streams. • Professional assessment of unstable terrain and gullies to minimize potential of mass wasting into streams and fish habitat. • Deactivation of road networks after harvesting activities have been completed. • Restoration of streams and riparian areas from historical logging activities.

Generally, the forestry companies operating on the North Coast are striving for continual improvement of forest harvesting activities around streams. Recently Interfor, Triumph Timber and Interpac contracted Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. to assess impacts to stream channels in harvested areas and identify potential downstream affects (Triton 2003, in press). Management of harvesting activities to maintain a low risk to streams and fish habitat is a primary driver in how harvesting plans are developed and implemented. Typically, stream values and risks are identified in advance, and blocks are laid out to protect stream values. Areas that have the potential to lead to stream or fish habitat problems are usually left out of blocks entirely, or managed through

Page 33

prescriptions developed by registered professionals (Foresters usually, geoscientists and biologists also). However, conflicts between fisheries and forestry values do exist and include:

• Logging up to the banks of S4 streams • Logging up to the banks of S5 and S6 (non fish bearing) streams. • Logging related slope failures that contribute excess sediments into fish habitat. • Chronic sedimentation from forestry roads. • Log dumps and load outs in lakes, rivers and marine areas contribute excessive amounts of woody debris that accumulate on the bottom. • Machine disturbance of small (S6) stream channels. • Disturbance of stream channels in karst topography that affects downstream fish habitat. • Failure to recognize fisheries sensitive areas. • Increased vulnerability to blowdown of riparian reserve zones.

The General Management Direction (GMD) outlined later in this document is designed to address these and other development conflicts with fish and riparian ecosystems.

Some forest companies are implementing environmental protection strategies that are incremental to those required under the FPC. These include:

• Leaving S4 streams out of the block entirely. Typically, potential cutblocks are laid out in the field along the mountain side adjacent to a mainstem river. Many of the small streams that feed into the mainstem are classified as S4 from the mainstem up to the break in slope along the mountain side, where stream gradient increases and classification changes from S4 to S6. While the cutblock could extend out to the edge of the reserve zone adjacent to the mainstem, and include portions of these S4 streams (which could be clearcut), the final boundary is often laid out where these streams change from S4 to S6. Harvesting of S4 streams does occur, but on a limited basis. Recent statistics provided on the canadianrainforests.org website 1 that 85% of fish bearing streams are logged are somewhat misleading. It may be true that 85% of fish streams in blocks are logged, however the vast majority of fish streams are not in blocks and have not been logged and are protected under existing legislated reserve zones (all S1 to S3 streams).

• Special management (or no harvesting) where stream stability may be an issue. Throughout the office planning and field layout process, streams with potential stability issues are identified. Where the scope of developing and implementing special management around these streams exceeds the potential value of the timber, or doesn’t sufficiently reduce the potential risk, no harvest zones are implemented. Where timber values are high, and risk appears to be manageable, a registered professional (typically a P. Geo.) undertakes an assessment and recommends mitigation strategies to ensure the stream and downstream values are managed to a low risk. All streams in or near blocks are typically assessed in the field to identify potential stability problems that may occur due to logging. These are nearly always non-fish bearing streams, as fish bearing streams are typically not in cutblocks (and all fish bearing streams >1.5m wide have reserve zones). These assessments address a stream’s potential to transport sediment and debris, its dependence on downed wood to

1 http://www.canadianrainforests.org/report_findings/streams Page 34

maintain channel morphology, and the stability of its banks. Silviculture prescriptions are then prepared that detail harvest and silviculture activities in the stream’s management zone which might include fall away, yard away, selective harvest, and windthrow management. The management zone of streams with low transport potential, stable banks and little to no dependence on downed wood are usually clearcut.

The above review is not intended to be a thorough description of all activities undertaken to protect streams and fish habitats, but rather a highlight of key areas.

4.0 Summary of Existing Watershed Restoration Priorities

Forest Renewal BC, through the Watershed Restoration Program (WRP) initiated a number of projects in the North Coast Forest District to identify watersheds degraded by historical logging practices and develop and implement restoration plans. Overview assessments of several of the watersheds in the Forest District were completed by Jyrkannen Environmental Consulting (1997). Detailed assessments of high priority watersheds were completed by Triton (1998a and b). Major instream works were designed and completed by Triton in Kumealon (Triton 1999), and in Silver Creek (Triton 2002). Extensive road deactivation projects were also implemented, and some riparian assessments were also completed. .

In 2000, the Ministries of Forests and Environment and industry stakeholders, with the support of Forest Renewal B.C, established working groups throughout the Prince Rupert Forest region. Part of their mandate was to prioritize watersheds for restoration works and identify the progress made towards completion of watershed restoration for these watersheds. This work is summarized in the Resource Management Plan, chapter 3, Enhancing Environmental Values2 and is available on the internet (see web site address in footnote below). The following table is taken from that report, and summarizes the status of restoration work in priority watersheds in the North Coast Forest District.

Table 19: Summary of WRP status in priority watersheds in the North Coast.

Watershed Overview Assessment Restoration Prescriptions Major Works Routine Effectiveness ete Unit y Plans Evaluation e d

K Up- Riparian In- In- Full Up- Riparian In- Up- Riparian In- Up- Riparian In- Priority Targ slope Stream terim slope Stream slope Stream slope Stream Kumealon Y Yes C C C C C C C C NR P C NR P C Quottoon Y Yes C C C C C NR P P NR P P NR P P Tuck Y Yes C C C C C C P C NR P C NR P P Union Y Yes C C C C C P P NR P P NR P P NR Kaien Y No P Kitkiata Y No C C C C C P Kwinamass Y No NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR Porcher Y No C C C P Scotia Y No C C C C C P Skeena Is. Y No P=Planned (Scheduled/not underway). O= Ongoing (commenced/not complete). C= Complete (no further work scheduled). NR= Not required (restorative work not required for this component)

2 http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/ftp/hcp/external/!publish/Resource_Management_Planning/RMP_2002_2003/RMPs/prince_rupert/ Page 35

No one document exists that summarizes the complete slate of upslope, instream and riparian assessments, prescriptions and implementation projects that have been completed since the inception of FRBC and the Watershed Restoration Program in the mid 1990’s. Although such a document may be of interest, its value as a practical document is diminished in the short term due to a lack of funding to advance planning and implementation of restoration projects. The above table should provide sufficient direction towards which watersheds further restoration work should be directed.

Page 36

5.0 References

Technical Reports

Bunnell, F. L., G. D. Sutherland, and T. R. Wahbe. Vertebrates associated with riparian habitats on British Columbia’s mainland coast. Riparian Decision Tool Technical Report #5. Prepared with Support from Joint Solutions Project. Reporting to provide background information to the Coast Information Team Hydroriparian Planning Guide.

Church, M. and B. Eaton. 2001. Hydrological Effects of Forest Harvest in the Pacific Northwest. Technical Report #3. Prepared with Support from Joint Solutions Project. Reporting to provide background information to the Coast Information Team Hydroriparian Planning Guide.

Price, K. and D. McLennan. 2002. Impacts of Forest Harvesting on Terrestrial Riparian Ecosystems of the Pacific Northwest. Riparian Decision Tool Technical Report #7. Prepared with Support from Joint Solutions Project. Reporting to provide background information to the Coast Information Team Hydroriparian Planning Guide.

Trainor, K. 2001. Ecosystem Sub-Units. Central Coast, North Coast & Haida Gwaii Plan Areas. Technical Report #2. Prepared with Support from Joint Solutions Project. Reporting to provide background information to the Coast Information Team Hydroriparian Planning Guide.

Trainor, K. 2001. Geomorphological/Hydrological Assessment of the Central Coast Plan Area. Riparian Decision Tool Technical Report #1. Prepared with Support from Joint Solutions Project. Reporting to provide background information to the Coast Information Team Hydroriparian Planning Guide.

Young, K. A. 2001. A review and meta-analysis of the effects of riparian zone logging on stream ecosystems in the Pacific Northwest. Riparian Decision Tool Technical Report #4. Prepared with Support from Joint Solutions Project. Reporting to provide background information to the Coast Information Team Hydroriparian Planning Guide.

Zielke, K. and B. Bancroft. 2001. A Comparison of Riparian Protection Approaches in the Pacific Northwest and British Columbia. Riparian Decision Tool Technical Report #6. Prepared with Support from Joint Solutions Project. Reporting to provide background information to the Coast Information Team Hydroriparian Planning Guide.

General References

Bahr, M. 2002. Examination of bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) in the Morice River watershed. Final Report prepared for Canadian Forest Products Ltd., Houston Forest Products, Ltd., BC Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and Forest Renewal BC.

Page 37

BC Conservation Data Centre. BC Species and Ecosystems Explorer. 2003. http://srmapps.gov.bc.ca:8888/apps/eswp/search_reset.do;jsessionid=a14a3ab66b3b4641ba2 a91c82a627fd2.

Beasley, B., and P. Wright. 2001. Criteria & Indicators Briefing Paper. Background Report. North Coast LRMP.

Beere, M. July 7, 2003. Personal Communication.

Behnke, R. J. 1992. Native Trout of Western North America. American Fisheries Society Monograph 6. Bethesda, Maryland.

Butt, G. 1999. Harvesting Impacts on Karst Terrain Chapple Inlet Princess Royal Island, Proposed Chapple Inlet Development. Prepared for International Forest Products Ltd. North Coast Operations and Ministry of Forests, North Coast Forest District.

Chilibeck, Barry. 1992. Land Development Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Habitat. Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Integrated Management Branch. BC Environment.

Coast Information Team. 2003. Ecosystem-Based Management Framework..

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 2003. www.cosewic.gc.ca/index.htm.

COSEWIC 2003, COSEWIC’s Assessment Process and Criteria. Last update 15 April 2003.

Dave Bustard and Associates. 1995. Fisheries Assessment and Stream Classification of Chambers Creek. Prepared for Skeena Sawmills Ltd. Terrace, B.C.

Department of Fisheries and Oceans 2000a. Status of the eulachon Thaleichthys pacificus in Canada. Canadian Stock Assessment Secretariat, Research Document 2000/145. Ottawa, Canada.

Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 1999. Eulachon. DFO Science Stick Status Report B6-06 (1999).

Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 1998. Habitat Conservation and Protection Guidelines. 2nd edition. Developed from the Policy for the Management of Fish habitat (1986).

Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 1986. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat. Ottawa, Ontario. 28 pp.

Dorner, B., and C. Wong. 2003. Natural Disturbance Dynamics on the North Coast. Background Report for the North Coast LRMP.

FINS Consulting Ltd. 2001. Reconnaissance (1:20 000) Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory. Chambers Creek Area Fish Inventory-2000. WSC’s: 500-009000: Chambers Creek

Page 38

Watershed, 500-010700: Johnson C. (Alias) Watershed. Prepared for Skeena Sawmills (A Division of West Fraser Mills Ltd.) Terrace, B.C.

Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory (FFHI) Report Index. 2003. http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/fish/ric/.

FISS Database. Report Server. 2003. http://srmapps.gov.bc.ca:8888/apps/fidq/fissReport.do;jsessionid=bf8a2f7f2fb34d5faeffd455 02eeec02.

Forest Practices Code of British Columbia. 1995. Riparian Management Area Guidebook. Province of British Columbia.

Forest Practices Code of British Columbia. 1999. Coastal Watershed Assessment Procedure Guidebook (CWAP). Interior Watershed Assessment Procedure Guidebook (IWAP). 2nd ed. Version 2.1. Province of British Columbia.

Forest Practices Code of British Columbia. 1999. Mapping and Assessing Terrain Stability Guidebook. 2nd edition. Province of British Columbia.

Forest Practices Code of British Columbia. 2002. Fish-stream Crossing Guidebook. Province of British Columbia.

Gustavson, K., and D. Brown. 2002. Monitoring Land Use Impacts on Fish Sustainability in Forest Environments. Final Report. Prepared for Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management.

Heath, D. Jan 28, 2003. Personal communication.

Holt, R. F. 2001. An Ecosystem-Based Management Planning Framework for the North Coast LRMP. Background Report. North Coast LRMP.

Jyrkkanen Environmental Consulting. 1997. Interfor Watershed Restoration Program Overview Fisheries Assessment of Kumealon, Moore Cove, Brown Lake, Kromann, Tyke, Scotia, Big Falls, carthew, Hayward, Snag Point, Little Windsor, Big Windsor, Porcher Island, Spiller, E. Side Creeks, Humpback watersheds. WRP Contract CSK 2059 for Interfor. 7 Appendices, Accompanying Impact Maps and Photography:155.

Levings, C. and G. Jamieson. 2001. Marine and Estuarine Riparian Habitats and Their Role in Coastal Ecosystems, Pacific Region. Fisheries & Oceans Canada, Science Branch. Research Document 2001/109. ISSN 1480-4883. Ottawa, ON.

Liepens, Sarma. Undated. Rich Ecosystem Database. Strategic Planning Biologist. Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management of British Columbia. Prince Rupert, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Unnamed Lake WSC: 910-565700. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Page 39

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Unnamed Lake WSC: 915-565500-23400. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Unnamed Lake “Chute Lake” WSC: 915-566500-13800. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Caponero Lake WSC: 910-716300. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Kxngeal Lake WSC: 910-756700. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Bardon Lake WSC: 915-567300-27300. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Salter Lake WSC: 915-560200-82200. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Wyndham Lake WSC: 915-560200-80600. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Tuwartz Lake WSC: 915-560200-93500. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Triumph Lake WSC: 910-584500. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Unnamed Lake WSC: 915-566500-23400. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Unnamed Lake WSC: 910-565700. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Unnamed Lake WSC: 910-724000. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Page 40

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Unnamed Lake WSC: 915-560200-34300-. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Stephen Nelson Lake WSC: 915-560200-12200. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Unnamed Lake “Tyke Lake” WSC: 910-779100. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Unnamed Lake “Hartley Bay Lake” WSC: 910-728100-00000-. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Alty Lake WSC: 910-721600-57700-01-. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Toon Lake WSC: 910-855600-01. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Bill Lake WSC: 910-850400-01. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Kumealon Lake WSC: 910-768900-01. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Unnamed Lake on Gribbell Island WSC: 915-566500-724-000. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Madeline Lake WSC: 400-016500-220-02. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Unnamed Lake (“Angler Cove Lake”) WSC: 910-5641-000. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Union Lake WSC: 910-8719-02. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Page 41

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Sylvia Lake WSC: 915-5602-838-02. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Saunders Lake WSC: 915-5602-814-01. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and B. Williams. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Gavel Lake WSC: 910-713900-33300. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and B. Williams. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Belowe Lake WSC: 910-736000. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K. and B. Williams. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory of Lowe Lake WSC: 910-740100. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K., S. Brown and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Kergin Lake WSC: 910-7919-03. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K., S. Brown and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Unnamed Lake (“Sarah” Lake) WSC: 910-8620-000. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K., S. Brown and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Minerva Lake WSC: 400-0182-02. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Mason, K., S. Brown and A. Lewis. Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1997. A Reconnaissance Inventory of Unnamed Lake WSC: 400-0361-577-000. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Ministry of Forests. 1994. Cave/Karst Management Handbook for the Vancouver Forest Region. Province of British Columbia.

Morrell, M. 2000. Status of Salmon Spawning Stocks of the Skeena River System. Northwest Institute for Bioregional Research, Smithers, B.C.

Proctor, B. 2003. The Ranking of North Coast Coho Streams for Rearing Productivity and Biodiversity: Supplemental Fisheries Report for the North Coast Land Resource Management Plan.

Scott, W. B. and E. J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Bulletin 184. Fisheries Research Board of Canada. Ottawa, Canada.

Page 42

SKR Consultants Ltd. 1998. Reconnaissance (1:20,000) fish and fish habitat inventory for selected tributaries to the lower Ecstall river, Watershed Code: 400-016500. Unpublished manuscript prepared in association with applied ecosystem management for International Forest Products Ltd., Terrace. ix + 28pp + Appendices and Attachments.

Slaney, TL, KD Hyatt, TG Northcote, and RJ Fielden. 1996. Status of anadromous salmon and trout in British Columbia and Yukon. Fisheries 21 (10): 20-35

Species At Risk. 2003. www.speciesatrisk.gc.ca.

Stoffels, D. 2001. Eulachon in the North Coast. Background Report. North Coast LRMP.

Tamblyn, G. C. and H. Horn. 2001. Current Conditions Report: North Coast Land and Resource Management Plan. North Coast LRMP.

Taylor, B. 2000. Implementing adaptive management through the North Coast LRMP. Background Report. North Coast LRMP.

Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998a. 1:20 000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory. Khtada Watershed. Prepared for International Forest Products Ltd., Terrace, B.C. and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1998b. Level II Fish and Fish Habitat Assessments. Porcher Island, Spiller River, Chismore Creek, Humpback Creek. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 1999. Level II Detailed Survey and Design of a Side Channel to Kumealon Creek. Prepared for Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Smithers, B.C.

Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2000. Kumealon Creek Construction Summary.

Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2001. Silver Creek WRP Design for Fish Habitat Rehabilitation.

Triton Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2003 (in press). North Coast Riparian Impact Assessment. Consultant report prepared under FIA funding for Interfor, Triumph Timber, Interpac.

Zielke, K. and B. Bancroft. 2001. A Comparison of Riparian Protection Approaches in the Pacific Northwest and British Columbia. Riparian Decision Tool Technical Report #6. Prepared with Support from Joint Solutions Project. Reporting to provide background information to the Coast Information Team Hydroriparian Planning Guide.

Zimmerling, T., W. Sheridan and A. Coosemans. 2001. North Coast Forest District Fisheries Data and Information Compilation Project. Prepared for the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Skeena Region. Smithers, B.C.

Page 43

Appendix I. DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Background Report: Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix I: DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Escapement Means by Decade

Mean (50- Historical % Hist. Stock Watershed Code Stream Name Species 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2001 Max Stock Status 01) Mean (50-89) Mean2 Classification

915560200690000000000000000000000000000000000 Alpha Creek COHO 239 503 70 35 3 1500 235 258 1% H Potentially Threatened 915560200690000000000000000000000000000000000 Alpha Creek CHUM 78 50 0 1 4 200 32 37 11% H Potentially Threatened 915560200690000000000000000000000000000000000 Alpha Creek PINK 3655 2040 3730 7570 15917 40000 6941 4249 375% L Unthreatened 910564100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Angler Cove Creek CHUM 450 400 30 39 32 1800 170 239 14% H Potentially Threatened 910564100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Angler Cove Creek COHO 33 100 0 0 54 200 32 26 205% S-1 Of Some Concern 910564100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Angler Cove Creek SOCKEYE 0000140 0 Questionable 910564100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Angler Cove Creek PINK 810 25 20 693 964 4000 736 627 154% L Unthreatened 910979300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Belle Bay Creek COHO 0 0 0 11 0 100 2 3 0% Questionable 910979300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Belle Bay Creek PINK 0 0 358 3715 1992 10000 1090 876 227% L Unthreatened 910736000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Belowe Creek CHUM 3195 2278 1311 345 479 9000 1526 1794 27% M Potentially Threatened 910736000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Belowe Creek COHO 1000 648 8 155 1 1500 410 454 0% H Potentially Threatened 910736000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Belowe Creek PINK 4300 2640 2918 4700 6065 15000 4125 3639 167% L Unthreatened 400016500242000000000000000000000000000000000 Big Falls Creek CHINOOK 15 33 32 7 0 75 19 20 0% H Potentially Threatened 400016500242000000000000000000000000000000000 Big Falls Creek CHUM 0 43 0 0 0 200 10 11 0% Questionable 400016500242000000000000000000000000000000000 Big Falls Creek PINK 373 211 6 14 0 1500 152 165 0% H Potentially Threatened 915567300191000000000000000000000000000000000 Big Tillhorn River COHO 81 006040032340%HPotentially Threatened 915567300191000000000000000000000000000000000 Big Tillhorn River CHUM 150 200 48 52 37 450 82 106 35% M Potentially Threatened 915567300191000000000000000000000000000000000 Big Tillhorn River SOCKEYE 0000130 0 Questionable 915567300191000000000000000000000000000000000 Big Tillhorn River PINK 1809 95 1324 1578 3040 7500 1788 1325 229% L Unthreatened 915765500702000000000000000000000000000000000 Big Useless Creek COHO 0 258 200 17 0 1500 91 101 0% H Potentially Threatened 915765500702000000000000000000000000000000000 Big Useless Creek PINK 6590 7220 3793 3455 2675 35000 4833 5264 51% S-3 Of Some Concern 915765500060000000000000000000000000000000000 Billy Creek COHO 235 715 90 105 0 1500 274 296 0% H Potentially Threatened 915765500060000000000000000000000000000000000 Billy Creek CHUM 00100100 0 0% Questionable 915765500060000000000000000000000000000000000 Billy Creek PINK 1645 3640 4470 3300 4056 14000 3409 3264 124% L Unthreatened 915541700213000000000000000000000000000000000 Blackrock Creek CHUM 1783 600 522 574 188 3500 792 888 21% M Potentially Threatened 915541700213000000000000000000000000000000000 Blackrock Creek COHO 0 20 67 31 200 21 21 0% No Recent Records 915541700213000000000000000000000000000000000 Blackrock Creek SOCKEYE 6 12 6 Questionable 915541700213000000000000000000000000000000000 Blackrock Creek PINK 975 1025 2960 4235 3018 15000 2431 2299 131% L Unthreatened 915560000751000000000000000000000000000000000 Bolton Creek SOCKEYE 150 280 48 0 20 1500 113 126 16% H Potentially Threatened 915560000751000000000000000000000000000000000 Bolton Creek COHO 140 215 48 31 83 750 110 112 74% S-1 Of Some Concern 915560000751000000000000000000000000000000000 Bolton Creek CHUM 228 000050049540%HPotentially Threatened 915560000751000000000000000000000000000000000 Bolton Creek PINK 985 675 675 1080 1265 5000 936 854 148% L Unthreatened 915483500627000000000000000000000000000000000 Borrowman Creek COHO 980 742 560 556 131 3500 655 709 19% H Potentially Threatened 915483500627000000000000000000000000000000000 Borrowman Creek SOCKEYE 515 266 1060 525 2 4000 580 611 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500627000000000000000000000000000000000 Borrowman Creek CHUM 444 771 375 793 376 3500 540 585 64% L Unthreatened 915483500627000000000000000000000000000000000 Borrowman Creek PINK 253 9739 16100 11000 9584 50000 9337 9261 103% L Unthreatened 915823500518000000000000000000000000000000000 Brundige Creek CHUM 0 0 0 45 17 150 11 10 160% S-1 Of Some Concern 915823500518000000000000000000000000000000000 Brundige Creek COHO 0 0 0 12 0 50 2 2 0% Questionable 915823500518000000000000000000000000000000000 Brundige Creek PINK 0 0 0 3198 2655 13500 1228 800 332% L Unthreatened 915560200665000000000000000000000000000000000 Captain Cove Creek SOCKEYE 315 760 370 200 37 1500 390 417 9% H Potentially Threatened 915560200665000000000000000000000000000000000 Captain Cove Creek COHO 315 595 198 336 12 1500 337 362 3% H Potentially Threatened 915560200665000000000000000000000000000000000 Captain Cove Creek CHUM 570 453 85 48 75 1500 239 289 26% M Potentially Threatened 915560200665000000000000000000000000000000000 Captain Cove Creek PINK 3400 9480 7340 8470 8667 35000 7517 7173 121% L Unthreatened 915538000176000000000000000000000000000000000 Cartwright Creek COHO 621 400 0 50 3 750 310 354 1% H Potentially Threatened 915538000176000000000000000000000000000000000 Cartwright Creek SOCKEYE 767 200 0 3 0 1500 193 209 0% H Potentially Threatened 915538000176000000000000000000000000000000000 Cartwright Creek CHUM 450 75 174 38 5 750 215 235 2% H Potentially Threatened 915538000176000000000000000000000000000000000 Cartwright Creek PINK 898 613 424 562 160 2000 585 662 24% M Potentially Threatened 500009000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Chambers Creek CHINOOK 13 246 50 0 1 1200 78 83 1% H Potentially Threatened 500009000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Chambers Creek CHUM 223 108 118 7 37 800 123 143 26% M Potentially Threatened 500009000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Chambers Creek COHO 0 0 0 113 107 320 21 13 806% S-1 Of Some Concern 500009000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Chambers Creek PINK 3000 5360 7760 12800 7500 25000 7464 7453 101% L Unthreatened 915560200972000000000000000000000000000000000 Cherry Creek COHO 575 271 13 75 0 750 274 288 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560200972000000000000000000000000000000000 Cherry Creek CHUM 575 372 119 15 0 750 291 303 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560200972000000000000000000000000000000000 Cherry Creek PINK 561 271 486 857 137 2300 504 544 25% M Potentially Threatened 915765500869000000000000000000000000000000000 Chismore Creek PINK 0 0 0 935 920 4100 371 234 394% L Unthreatened

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 1 of 10 Background Report: Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix I: DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Mean (50- Historical % Hist. Stock Watershed Code Stream Name Species 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2001 Max Stock Status 01) Mean (50-89) Mean2 Classification

915765500869000000000000000000000000000000000 Cliff Creek PINK 0 0 0 50 0 500 11 13 0% Questionable 915483500350000000000000000000000000000000000 Clifford Creek COHO 3740 1593 0 171 0 7500 1765 1826 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500350000000000000000000000000000000000 Clifford Creek CHUM 5220 1583 54 477 455 8000 1786 1966 23% M Potentially Threatened 915483500350000000000000000000000000000000000 Clifford Creek SOCKEYE 1265 700 0 0 0 3500 421 511 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500350000000000000000000000000000000000 Clifford Creek PINK 3325 2818 34 254 158 15000 1731 1894 8% H Potentially Threatened 910644700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Crab River CHUM 1244 350 447 315 131 3500 476 579 23% M Potentially Threatened 910644700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Crab River COHO 191 13 0 0 10 400 58 59 17% H Potentially Threatened 910644700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Crab River PINK 863 179 1469 2993 1312 9000 1460 1510 87% L Unthreatened 915541700306000000000000000000000000000000000 Crane Bay Creek CHUM 0 0 2 213 56 900 54 54 105% S-1 Of Some Concern 915541700306000000000000000000000000000000000 Crane Bay Creek COHO 00020100 0 0% Questionable 915541700306000000000000000000000000000000000 Crane Bay Creek PINK 0 0 3 1895 905 6000 567 475 191% L Unthreatened 915560200935000000000000000000000000000000000 Cridge Inlet Creek SOCKEYE 2348 2275 20 25 0 7500 1499 1549 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560200935000000000000000000000000000000000 Cridge Inlet Creek COHO 222 630 25 71 0 3500 285 304 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560200935000000000000000000000000000000000 Cridge Inlet Creek CHUM 0 0 0 37 0 110 3 4 0% Questionable 915560200935000000000000000000000000000000000 Cridge Inlet Creek PINK 0 0 0 487 83 1500 102 103 81% S-1 Of Some Concern 915560200343000000000000000000000000000000000 Curtis Inlet Creek SOCKEYE 5029 11425 3950 2370 3920 35000 5339 5694 69% L Unthreatened 915560200343000000000000000000000000000000000 Curtis Inlet Creek COHO 750 1265 1105 362 188 4000 819 883 21% M Potentially Threatened 915560200343000000000000000000000000000000000 Curtis Inlet Creek CHUM 0 0 150 50 9 500 45 50 18% H Potentially Threatened 915560200343000000000000000000000000000000000 Curtis Inlet Creek PINK 28 578 6390 7330 3330 30000 3553 3581 93% L Unthreatened 915560000588000000000000000000000000000000000 Deadman Creek COHO 213 534 38 123 0 750 224 279 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560000588000000000000000000000000000000000 Deadman Creek CHUM 475 129 69 62 4 750 103 128 3% H Potentially Threatened 915560000588000000000000000000000000000000000 Deadman Creek PINK 713 1884 878 2875 600 12000 1544 1713 35% M Potentially Threatened 915560000828000000000000000000000000000000000 Deer Lake Creek SOCKEYE 571 672 733 270 147 1500 499 567 26% M Potentially Threatened 915560000828000000000000000000000000000000000 Deer Lake Creek COHO 706 633 747 257 125 3000 553 609 21% M Potentially Threatened 915560000828000000000000000000000000000000000 Deer Lake Creek CHUM 250 106 515 88 0 1500 206 231 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560000828000000000000000000000000000000000 Deer Lake Creek PINK 2750 1110 4113 1363 2400 10000 2288 2262 106% L Unthreatened 910793700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Denise Creek CHUM 643 42 20 14 0 2000 286 334 0% H Potentially Threatened 910793700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Denise Creek COHO 16 82 28 26 0 400 34 39 0% H Potentially Threatened 910793700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Denise Creek PINK 634 0 6 128 27 3000 328 395 7% H Potentially Threatened 915483500721000000000000000000000000000000000 Devil Creek COHO 138 95 23 15 0 400 86 90 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500721000000000000000000000000000000000 Devil Creek CHUM 230 82 13 43 8 750 116 125 6% H Potentially Threatened 915483500721000000000000000000000000000000000 Devil Creek PINK 328 538 708 273 1017 3000 516 468 217% L Unthreatened 915560200249000000000000000000000000000000000 Devon Lake System SOCKEYE 4300 5450 2540 2890 3129 15000 3641 3795 82% L Unthreatened 915560200249000000000000000000000000000000000 Devon Lake System COHO 380 760 343 275 62 1500 408 457 14% H Potentially Threatened 915560200249000000000000000000000000000000000 Devon Lake System CHUM 75 25 13 0 75 14 25 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560200249000000000000000000000000000000000 Devon Lake System PINK 20 119 1294 2390 317 6500 1025 1091 29% M Potentially Threatened 910791900234000000000000000000000000000000000 Diana Creek SOCKEYE 5028 4200 1290 1320 1611 10000 2664 2906 55% L Unthreatened 910791900234000000000000000000000000000000000 Diana Creek COHO 2983 1220 320 296 800 7500 1105 1145 70% L Unthreatened 910791900234000000000000000000000000000000000 Diana Creek CHINOOK 0 225 125 10 0 400 62 72 0% H Potentially Threatened 910791900234000000000000000000000000000000000 Diana Creek CHUM 25 0 0 25 4 6 0% Questionable 910791900234000000000000000000000000000000000 Diana Creek PINK 200 400 0 0 0 400 33 35 0% Questionable 910971500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Dogfish Bay Creek PINK 6740 13300 13070 24125 10875 60000 13516 14309 76% L Unthreatened 910971500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Dogfish Bay Creek COHO 30 0 69 63 67 500 40 37 179% S-1 Of Some Concern 910971500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Dogfish Bay Creek CHUM 0 0 56 8 0 500 14 15 2% Questionable 915483500979000000000000000000000000000000000 Don Creek PINK 188 170 8363 3338 17350 52000 3831 2329 745% L Unthreatened 915483500979000000000000000000000000000000000 Don Creek COHO 535 293 65 151 0 1500 263 271 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500979000000000000000000000000000000000 Don Creek SOCKEYE 173 125 0 0 0 750 83 88 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500979000000000000000000000000000000000 Don Creek CHUM 195 94 13 53 0 750 115 121 0% H Potentially Threatened 910985000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Donahue Creek CHINOOK 0 155 53 0 0 400 53 56 0% H Potentially Threatened 910985000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Donahue Creek CHUM 427 1215 363 101 77 4000 560 623 12% H Potentially Threatened 910985000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Donahue Creek COHO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Questionable 910985000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Donahue Creek PINK 0 1090 475 2077 1700 6500 1021 870 195% L Unthreatened 915483500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Duffey Creek COHO 2550 697 125 128 5 7500 946 973 1% H Potentially Threatened 915483500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Duffey Creek SOCKEYE 1733 692 0 0 1 3500 741 795 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Duffey Creek CHUM 1525 1105 1005 1855 1026 3800 1309 1373 75% L Unthreatened 915483500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Duffey Creek PINK 1525 1622 159 409 64 3500 801 948 7% H Potentially Threatened

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 2 of 10 Background Report: Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix I: DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Mean (50- Historical % Hist. Stock Watershed Code Stream Name Species 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2001 Max Stock Status 01) Mean (50-89) Mean2 Classification

915483500546000000000000000000000000000000000 Eagle Creek COHO 5500 1345 1170 536 25 9000 2209 2268 1% H Potentially Threatened 915483500546000000000000000000000000000000000 Eagle Creek CHUM 6570 1480 1115 2363 1304 15000 2647 2882 45% S-3 Of Some Concern 915483500546000000000000000000000000000000000 Eagle Creek SOCKEYE 1425 942 19 215 3500 705 705 0% No Recent Records 915483500546000000000000000000000000000000000 Eagle Creek PINK 5940 4336 3975 2083 1323 18000 3651 4080 32% S-3 Of Some Concern 400016500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Ecstall River PINK 8900 1915 413 12833 27667 100000 10347 6134 451% L Unthreatened 400016500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Ecstall River CHUM 6056 10556 7250 16145 6300 75000 9370 10200 62% L Unthreatened 400016500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Ecstall River COHO 0 1250 1417 3188 5500 10000 1871 1371 401% L Unthreatened 400016500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Ecstall River CHINOOK 778 2025 1545 2005 608 3800 1476 1609 38% M Potentially Threatened 400016500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Ecstall River SOCKEYE 0 0 25 205 458 1400 110 58 797% L Unthreatened 915560000629000000000000000000000000000000000 End Hill Creek PINK 9000 10700 7600 2200 4400 35000 6879 7375 60% L Unthreatened 915560000629000000000000000000000000000000000 End Hill Creek COHO 2300 3300 1665 379 180 7500 1736 1941 9% H Potentially Threatened 915560000629000000000000000000000000000000000 End Hill Creek SOCKEYE 2998 3150 1067 483 80 7500 1703 1929 4% H Potentially Threatened 915560000629000000000000000000000000000000000 End Hill Creek CHUM 430 585 45 19 2 1500 308 360 1% H Potentially Threatened 910863100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Ensheshese River PINK 5700 8750 8350 12550 9750 35000 9048 8838 110% L Unthreatened 910863100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Ensheshese River CHUM 1470 2161 3267 1240 876 6000 1747 1999 44% M Potentially Threatened 910863100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Ensheshese River CHINOOK 0 0 39 0 0 200 8 10 0% Questionable 910863100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Ensheshese River COHO 408 0 525 1220 2250 3500 761 538 418% L Unthreatened 910863100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Ensheshese River SOCKEYE 0000020 0 0% Questionable 915560200742000000000000000000000000000000000 False Stewart Creek COHO 275 344 133 49 7 750 218 244 3% H Potentially Threatened 915560200742000000000000000000000000000000000 False Stewart Creek SOCKEYE 00002100 0 Questionable 915560200742000000000000000000000000000000000 False Stewart Creek CHUM 0000150 0 Questionable 915560200742000000000000000000000000000000000 False Stewart Creek PINK 2163 4295 1839 3030 4759 12000 3276 2857 167% L Unthreatened 915567300781000000000000000000000000000000000 Fishtrap Bay Creek CHUM 00059502 1905% Questionable 915567300781000000000000000000000000000000000 Fishtrap Bay Creek COHO 00060251 1 0% Questionable 915567300781000000000000000000000000000000000 Fishtrap Bay Creek PINK 0 0 0 1600 573 3200 435 400 143% L Unthreatened 500010700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Flewin Creek PINK 229 1207 131 885 1709 10000 884 608 281% L Unthreatened 915483500351000000000000000000000000000000000 Flux Creek CHUM 0 731 1330 1270 1526 3400 981 838 182% L Unthreatened 915483500351000000000000000000000000000000000 Flux Creek COHO 0 475 522 237 60 1200 283 295 20% M Potentially Threatened 915483500351000000000000000000000000000000000 Flux Creek SOCKEYE 0 193 0 0 8 750 42 45 19% Questionable 915483500351000000000000000000000000000000000 Flux Creek PINK 0 363 499 276 324 1600 275 262 124% L Unthreatened 915765500242000000000000000000000000000000000 Foote Creek COHO 2025 2156 155 90 40 3500 982 1106 4% H Potentially Threatened 915765500242000000000000000000000000000000000 Foote Creek CHUM 40 40 8 0 0 400 19 22 0% H Potentially Threatened 915765500242000000000000000000000000000000000 Foote Creek PINK 2230 8290 3405 413 50 20000 3321 3751 1% H Potentially Threatened 915483500862000000000000000000000000000000000 Fury Creek PINK 213 504 5268 4455 9476 65000 3971 2780 341% L Unthreatened 915483500862000000000000000000000000000000000 Fury Creek COHO 498 596 129 100 1500 363 363 0% No Recent Records 915483500862000000000000000000000000000000000 Fury Creek SOCKEYE 335 297 65 30 750 198 198 0% No Recent Records 915483500862000000000000000000000000000000000 Fury Creek CHUM 270 190 89 272 34 750 185 209 16% H Potentially Threatened 910991800000000000000000000000000000000000000 Georgie River CHUM 1000 3580 847 467 150 15000 1540 1713 9% H Potentially Threatened 910991800000000000000000000000000000000000000 Georgie River COHO 0 3475 817 0 0 12000 1240 1431 0% H Potentially Threatened 910991800000000000000000000000000000000000000 Georgie River CHINOOK 0 695 144 0 0 2000 213 245 0% H Potentially Threatened 910991800000000000000000000000000000000000000 Georgie River PINK 0 2615 1488 4500 2500 6000 1907 1835 136% L Unthreatened 915541700878000000000000000000000000000000000 Gil Creek PINK 915 738 6463 24150 23927 60000 12159 8563 279% L Unthreatened 915541700878000000000000000000000000000000000 Gil Creek CHUM 543 300 56 290 468 1800 369 338 138% L Unthreatened 915541700878000000000000000000000000000000000 Gil Creek COHO 213 390 55 163 1500 202 202 0% No Recent Records 915541700878000000000000000000000000000000000 Gil Creek SOCKEYE 0000010 0557% Questionable 910565700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Goat River CHUM 275 119 11 19 35 750 88 104 34% M Potentially Threatened 910565700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Goat River COHO 89 0 7 0 300 25 25 0% No Recent Records 910565700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Goat River PINK 368 80 163 502 466 1500 360 326 143% L Unthreatened 915742200433000000000000000000000000000000000 Hankin Creek PINK 5390 5550 4665 7170 15250 80000 7899 5694 268% L Unthreatened 915742200433000000000000000000000000000000000 Hankin Creek COHO 17 39 150 140 8 300 75 83 9% H Potentially Threatened 915742200433000000000000000000000000000000000 Hankin Creek CHUM 0 0 0 85 0 260 13 14 0% Questionable 910728100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Hartley Bay Creek COHO 392 817 983 556 1100 3500 755 714 154% L Unthreatened 910728100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Hartley Bay Creek SOCKEYE 690 928 244 432 374 1500 523 565 66% L Unthreatened 910728100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Hartley Bay Creek CHUM 219 106 342 55 6 1500 136 163 4% H Potentially Threatened 910728100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Hartley Bay Creek PINK 575 1956 1160 5594 1780 15000 2364 2531 70% L Unthreatened 915789100270000000000000000000000000000000000 Hays Creek COHO 36 57 130 44 36 157% S-1 Of Some Concern

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 3 of 10 Background Report: Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix I: DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Mean (50- Historical % Hist. Stock Watershed Code Stream Name Species 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2001 Max Stock Status 01) Mean (50-89) Mean2 Classification

915789100270000000000000000000000000000000000 Hays Creek PINK 0 0 12 3 50 3 3 97% Questionable 400016500141000000000000000000000000000000000 Hayward Creek COHO 0 56 85 0 200 31 34 0% H Potentially Threatened 400016500141000000000000000000000000000000000 Hayward Creek PINK 1537 779 164 833 5000 935 948 88% L Unthreatened 915765500186000000000000000000000000000000000 Head Creek PINK 4050 11510 12495 12870 6700 60000 9416 10231 65% L Unthreatened 915765500186000000000000000000000000000000000 Head Creek COHO 8 22 35 48 3 200 25 27 9% H Potentially Threatened 915765500186000000000000000000000000000000000 Head Creek CHUM 30036252 1480% Questionable 915560200535000000000000000000000000000000000 Hevenor Inlet Creek COHO 3129 1842 214 235 83 6900 1205 1350 6% H Potentially Threatened 915560200535000000000000000000000000000000000 Hevenor Inlet Creek CHUM 1890 723 280 188 84 4000 676 801 11% H Potentially Threatened 915560200535000000000000000000000000000000000 Hevenor Inlet Creek SOCKEYE 484 42 17 2 750 166 208 1% H Potentially Threatened 915560200535000000000000000000000000000000000 Hevenor Inlet Creek PINK 83 908 1205 2267 2375 15000 1305 1086 219% L Unthreatened 910637900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Hotspring Creek CHUM 2188 1088 30 100 137 8000 699 992 14% H Potentially Threatened 910637900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Hotspring Creek COHO 61 0 0 0 10 200 17 18 56% S-1 Of Some Concern 910637900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Hotspring Creek SOCKEYE 0000010 0 Questionable 910637900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Hotspring Creek PINK 1800 571 8 668 452 4500 768 909 50% M Potentially Threatened 915765500826000000000000000000000000000000000 Humpback Creek PINK 7033 2093 3175 6520 4358 30000 4625 4705 93% L Unthreatened 915765500826000000000000000000000000000000000 Humpback Creek COHO 0 58 8 8 50 400 20 19 257% S-1 Of Some Concern 915765500768000000000000000000000000000000000 Hunts Creek COHO 00020200 1 0% Questionable 915765500768000000000000000000000000000000000 Hunts Creek PINK 0 0 0 680 213 2765 174 170 125% L Unthreatened 910929800000000000000000000000000000000000000 Illiance River CHUM 7088 3840 3650 1775 2496 22000 3721 4088 61% L Unthreatened 910929800000000000000000000000000000000000000 Illiance River COHO 1422 150 165 550 400 3500 536 550 73% L Unthreatened 910929800000000000000000000000000000000000000 Illiance River PINK 250 0 778 1222 2488 6000 1007 539 461% L Unthreatened 915560000207000000000000000000000000000000000 Indian Harbour Creek COHO 1500 680 806 278 15 2000 541 655 2% H Potentially Threatened 915560000207000000000000000000000000000000000 Indian Harbour Creek CHUM 250 67 1160 125 0 3000 272 329 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560000207000000000000000000000000000000000 Indian Harbour Creek SOCKEYE 00002100 0 Questionable 915560000207000000000000000000000000000000000 Indian Harbour Creek PINK 0 0 155 78 0 800 51 57 0% H Potentially Threatened 400016500500000000000000000000000000000000000 Johnston Creek CHINOOK 2900 2889 465 355 150 7500 1424 1621 9% H Potentially Threatened 400016500500000000000000000000000000000000000 Johnston Creek CHUM 378 353 310 114 200 1500 288 291 69% L Unthreatened 400016500500000000000000000000000000000000000 Johnston Creek COHO 295 40 50 125 0 1000 124 128 0% H Potentially Threatened 400016500500000000000000000000000000000000000 Johnston Creek SOCKEYE 0000171002 016667% Questionable 400016500500000000000000000000000000000000000 Johnston Creek PINK 1038 700 60 126 367 4500 481 490 75% L Unthreatened 400016500500000000000000000000000000000000000 Johnston Lake SOCKEYE 1410 214 2750 550 4100 8000 1703 1267 324% L Unthreatened 400016500500000000000000000000000000000000000 Johnston Lake CHINOOK 5 25 0 0 0 200 8 8 0% H Potentially Threatened 400016500500000000000000000000000000000000000 Johnston Lake COHO 0 15 0 56 233 500 32 17 1396% L Unthreatened 400016500500000000000000000000000000000000000 Johnston Lake CHUM 15 15 0 5 50 100 12 9 576% S-1 Of Some Concern 400016500500000000000000000000000000000000000 Johnston Lake PINK 100 200 100 Questionable 915483500199000000000000000000000000000000000 Kdelmashan Creek PINK 868 3489 6600 522 398 20000 2313 2545 16% M Potentially Threatened 915483500199000000000000000000000000000000000 Kdelmashan Creek CHUM 2878 1872 1289 1972 1835 7500 2007 2025 91% L Unthreatened 915483500199000000000000000000000000000000000 Kdelmashan Creek COHO 1228 650 569 331 0 3500 696 715 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500199000000000000000000000000000000000 Kdelmashan Creek SOCKEYE 83 444 950 378 0 3000 465 478 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560000804000000000000000000000000000000000 Keecha Creek PINK 7475 3878 3735 4000 2606 17500 4441 4838 54% L Unthreatened 915560000804000000000000000000000000000000000 Keecha Creek SOCKEYE 3234 3880 1080 1886 1955 15000 2602 2804 70% L Unthreatened 915560000804000000000000000000000000000000000 Keecha Creek COHO 572 1015 650 234 229 2500 608 651 35% M Potentially Threatened 915560000804000000000000000000000000000000000 Keecha Creek CHUM 360 283 183 75 0 1000 233 254 0% H Potentially Threatened 910727100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Keesil Creek COHO 88 55 0 100 56 64 0% H Potentially Threatened 910727100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Keesil Creek CHUM 13 15 0 25 12 14 0% Questionable 910727100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Keesil Creek PINK 500 461 0 1000 423 469 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560000046000000000000000000000000000000000 Kenzuwash Creeks SOCKEYE 750 938 150 0 10 1500 336 517 2% H Potentially Threatened 915560000046000000000000000000000000000000000 Kenzuwash Creeks CHUM 100 00001000 22 25 0% Questionable 915560000046000000000000000000000000000000000 Kenzuwash Creeks COHO 750 150 30 138 43 750 112 125 34% M Potentially Threatened 915742200326000000000000000000000000000000000 Keswar Creek PINK 4625 1455 3706 1975 3000 16000 2934 2925 103% L Unthreatened 915742200326000000000000000000000000000000000 Keswar Creek COHO 1050 1180 575 264 117 3500 748 800 15% H Potentially Threatened 915742200326000000000000000000000000000000000 Keswar Creek SOCKEYE 438 1006 250 60 8 1500 451 525 1% H Potentially Threatened 915742200326000000000000000000000000000000000 Keswar Creek CHUM 769 214 25 0 0 2000 322 368 0% H Potentially Threatened 910887500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Khutzeymateen River PINK 8340 35025 17100 44700 60000 230000 34070 26291 228% L Unthreatened 910887500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Khutzeymateen River CHUM 2475 8878 9260 7000 5875 35000 6623 6853 86% L Unthreatened 910887500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Khutzeymateen River COHO 1245 544 1064 3970 4750 10000 2214 1792 265% L Unthreatened

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 4 of 10 Background Report: Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix I: DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Mean (50- Historical % Hist. Stock Watershed Code Stream Name Species 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2001 Max Stock Status 01) Mean (50-89) Mean2 Classification

910887500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Khutzeymateen River CHINOOK 0 1185 813 365 232 5000 511 595 39% M Potentially Threatened 910887500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Khutzeymateen River SOCKEYE 00010100 0 0% Questionable 400036100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Khyex River PINK 5090 10205 5950 43411 45818 220000 22143 15465 296% L Unthreatened 400036100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Khyex River CHUM 2360 267 288 319 120 10000 691 841 14% H Potentially Threatened 400036100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Khyex River COHO 20 1417 680 200 7500 662 681 29% M Potentially Threatened 400036100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Khyex River CHINOOK 400 206 44 149 110 750 134 146 75% S-1 Of Some Concern 910711600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kihess Creek CHUM 142 25 50 23 0 400 93 100 0% H Potentially Threatened 910711600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kihess Creek COHO 3 25 0 37 0 50 9 9 0% H Potentially Threatened 910711600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kihess Creek PINK 160 100 326 73 1100 184 209 35% M Potentially Threatened 910593300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kiltuish River PINK 2710 10255 3653 1019 971 50000 3616 4409 22% M Potentially Threatened 910593300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kiltuish River CHUM 7325 14525 2970 3895 1106 35000 5777 7179 15% S-3 Of Some Concern 910593300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kiltuish River COHO 2365 2500 264 144 56 7000 1148 1245 4% H Potentially Threatened 910593300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kiltuish River CHINOOK 40 0 3 5 400 14 14 0% No Recent Records 910593300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kiltuish River SOCKEYE 2 3 2 Questionable 915560000376000000000000000000000000000000000 Kingkown Inlet System PINK 2585 2805 13190 1400 60 67000 4664 5286 1% H Potentially Threatened 915560000376000000000000000000000000000000000 Kingkown Inlet System COHO 3740 3861 5350 1528 120 15000 3330 3668 3% H Potentially Threatened 915560000376000000000000000000000000000000000 Kingkown Inlet System SOCKEYE 3676 2300 6550 1860 2027 15000 3258 3597 56% L Unthreatened 915560000376000000000000000000000000000000000 Kingkown Inlet System CHUM 4590 1180 5500 1111 62 13000 2796 3146 2% H Potentially Threatened 910721600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kiskosh Creek PINK 10995 22667 17090 9900 6882 75000 13067 14971 46% S-3 Of Some Concern 910721600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kiskosh Creek CHUM 1245 420 192 90 51 6000 400 535 9% H Potentially Threatened 910721600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kiskosh Creek COHO 995 788 238 144 77 1500 501 554 14% H Potentially Threatened 910721600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kiskosh Creek SOCKEYE 00003131 0 Questionable 915765500370000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitkatla Creek PINK 8470 12680 7690 5650 9870 35000 8872 8623 114% L Unthreatened 915765500370000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitkatla Creek COHO 858 1490 106 170 0 3500 650 713 0% H Potentially Threatened 915765500370000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitkatla Creek CHUM 258 173 0 3 750 160 187 1% H Potentially Threatened 910713300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitkiata Creek PINK 8265 74778 28500 37900 46667 275000 38817 36401 128% L Unthreatened 910713300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitkiata Creek COHO 2558 2306 745 967 144 6000 1476 1620 9% H Potentially Threatened 910713300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitkiata Creek CHUM 1453 763 466 142 30 9000 558 701 4% H Potentially Threatened 910713300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitkiata Creek SOCKEYE 2780 2500 2140 1215 251 5800 1847 2141 12% M Potentially Threatened 910930200000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitsault River CHUM 5520 4475 7010 3565 3856 15000 4865 5143 75% L Unthreatened 910930200000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitsault River COHO 516 1080 1270 1157 0 3000 992 1021 0% H Potentially Threatened 910930200000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitsault River CHINOOK 550 393 411 120 49 1000 282 357 14% H Potentially Threatened 910930200000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kitsault River PINK 272 0 63 440 1428 3380 485 197 727% L Unthreatened 910748900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Klewnuggit Inlet Creek COHO 1133 961 400 170 450 1500 838 887 51% M Potentially Threatened 910748900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Klewnuggit Inlet Creek SOCKEYE 200 250 260 508 2000 357 244 209% L Unthreatened 910748900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Klewnuggit Inlet Creek CHUM 410 217 75 0 1 750 186 204 0% H Potentially Threatened 910748900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Klewnuggit Inlet Creek PINK 386 89 8 10 75 750 142 151 50% M Potentially Threatened 910791900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kloiya River COHO 0 375 644 96 75 1500 277 302 25% M Potentially Threatened 910791900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kloiya River CHINOOK 450 555 250 228 184 1500 336 364 51% S-1 Of Some Concern 910791900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kloiya River CHUM 200 183 25 0 1 400 67 100 1% H Potentially Threatened 910791900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kloiya River PINK 1235 821 60 692 1080 4000 920 877 123% L Unthreatened 915560000784000000000000000000000000000000000 Kooryet Creek PINK 4815 3075 9450 3650 7195 35000 5637 5248 137% L Unthreatened 915560000784000000000000000000000000000000000 Kooryet Creek SOCKEYE 2256 4850 540 1610 2193 15000 2290 2314 95% L Unthreatened 915560000784000000000000000000000000000000000 Kooryet Creek COHO 650 1175 615 205 110 1500 602 658 17% H Potentially Threatened 915560000784000000000000000000000000000000000 Kooryet Creek CHUM 753 308 148 100 24 3000 302 339 7% H Potentially Threatened 910941800000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kshwan River CHUM 4028 1150 7350 13200 12708 50000 8381 6939 183% L Unthreatened 910941800000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kshwan River COHO 513 0 0 544 0 2000 223 237 0% H Potentially Threatened 910941800000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kshwan River PINK 500 0 255 336 163 1500 237 247 66% S-1 Of Some Concern 910768900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kumealon Creek PINK 19800 48500 40100 32850 34167 120000 35048 35313 97% L Unthreatened 910768900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kumealon Creek COHO 1150 2361 360 181 163 7500 938 1022 16% H Potentially Threatened 910768900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kumealon Creek CHINOOK 238 8 9 58 60 400 74 76 79% S-1 Of Some Concern 910768900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kumealon Creek CHUM 725 370 96 55 67 1500 298 370 18% H Potentially Threatened 910768900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kumealon Creek SOCKEYE 0000161002 0 Questionable 910896600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kwinamass River PINK 13540 63500 64100 123000 95417 250000 72815 66035 144% L Unthreatened 910896600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kwinamass River COHO 935 7025 4444 3605 2600 20000 3833 3991 65% L Unthreatened 910896600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kwinamass River CHUM 2565 3950 4150 280 71 12000 2203 2736 3% H Potentially Threatened

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 5 of 10 Background Report: Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix I: DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Mean (50- Historical % Hist. Stock Watershed Code Stream Name Species 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2001 Max Stock Status 01) Mean (50-89) Mean2 Classification

910896600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kwinamass River CHINOOK 425 2400 930 315 295 5000 851 1018 29% M Potentially Threatened 910896600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kwinamass River SOCKEYE 00030251 1 0% Questionable 400066100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kwinitsa River COHO 0 0 35 5 0 75 9 11 0% H Potentially Threatened 400066100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kwinitsa River PINK 583 0 155 0 0 1200 176 194 0% H Potentially Threatened 910751000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kxngeal Creek CHUM 0 0 0 60 33 500 16 15 222% S-1 Of Some Concern 910751000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Kxngeal Creek PINK 0 0 0 900 1767 5000 508 225 785% L Unthreatened 910825400000000000000000000000000000000000000 La Hou Creek PINK 13870 7700 6370 22930 12864 70000 12749 12718 101% L Unthreatened 910825400000000000000000000000000000000000000 La Hou Creek COHO 1 428 0 29 0 3500 118 121 0% H Potentially Threatened 910846300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Lachmach River PINK 3786 2870 3833 5753 8669 24000 5262 4094 212% L Unthreatened 910846300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Lachmach River CHUM 950 167 608 42 178 3000 378 463 39% M Potentially Threatened 910846300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Lachmach River COHO 0 289 250 527 979 2500 365 260 376% L Unthreatened 910846300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Lachmach River CHINOOK 0000280 0 Questionable 910846300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Lachmach River SOCKEYE 0000020 01333% Questionable 915563500404140000000000000000000000000000000 Lagoon Creek CHUM 1663 335 1433 1100 115 7500 831 1099 10% H Potentially Threatened 915563500404140000000000000000000000000000000 Lagoon Creek COHO 30000251 1 0% Questionable 915563500404140000000000000000000000000000000 Lagoon Creek PINK 20 20 8 770 151 6000 194 204 74% S-1 Of Some Concern 910886100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Larch Creek CHUM 1 2 1 Questionable 910886100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Larch Creek PINK 0 0 0 250 812 2500 200 63 1300% L Unthreatened 910847300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Leverson Lake System PINK 2553 483 400 16 0 15000 1220 1331 0% H Potentially Threatened 910847300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Leverson Lake System CHUM 1405 214 180 5 140 3500 537 610 23% M Potentially Threatened 910847300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Leverson Lake System COHO 490 188 325 13 0 1500 269 306 0% H Potentially Threatened 910847300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Leverson Lake System SOCKEYE 167 180 13 0 0 750 85 94 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560000144000000000000000000000000000000000 Lewis Creek COHO 1639 1294 832 375 88 4000 1053 1191 7% H Potentially Threatened 915560000144000000000000000000000000000000000 Lewis Creek SOCKEYE 2000 1165 508 0 45 3500 998 1168 4% H Potentially Threatened 915560000144000000000000000000000000000000000 Lewis Creek CHUM 20 00002004 5 0% Questionable 915560000144000000000000000000000000000000000 Lewis Creek PINK 40 0 50 0 0 200 17 20 0% Questionable 915483500838000000000000000000000000000000000 Limestone Creek PINK 2380 6530 14950 9600 13889 55000 9380 8365 166% L Unthreatened 915483500838000000000000000000000000000000000 Limestone Creek CHUM 1740 1211 469 1625 371 9000 1105 1277 29% M Potentially Threatened 915483500838000000000000000000000000000000000 Limestone Creek COHO 803 1144 305 210 54 3500 571 612 9% H Potentially Threatened 915483500838000000000000000000000000000000000 Limestone Creek SOCKEYE 0 30 1178 303 10 6000 343 362 3% H Potentially Threatened 915483500132000000000000000000000000000000000 Linnea Creek CHUM 1713 1028 765 850 342 3500 991 1090 31% M Potentially Threatened 915483500132000000000000000000000000000000000 Linnea Creek COHO 783 275 164 31 0 1500 388 402 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500132000000000000000000000000000000000 Linnea Creek PINK 855 760 56 6 9 3500 486 548 2% H Potentially Threatened 915567300162000000000000000000000000000000000 Little Tillhorn River CHUM 56 113 20 5 31 250 44 51 61% S-1 Of Some Concern 915567300162000000000000000000000000000000000 Little Tillhorn River COHO 0000000 0 Questionable 915567300162000000000000000000000000000000000 Little Tillhorn River PINK 188 150 250 174 685 2100 337 179 382% L Unthreatened 915765500644000000000000000000000000000000000 Little Useless Creek PINK 3240 536 25 2075 550 15000 1589 1923 29% M Potentially Threatened 915765500644000000000000000000000000000000000 Little Useless Creek COHO 40 00004009100% Questionable 915765500644000000000000000000000000000000000 Little Useless Creek CHUM 0000020 0 0% Questionable 915896000803000000000000000000000000000000000 Lizard Creek PINK 0 0 856 1894 5550 14000 1672 651 852% L Unthreatened 915896000803000000000000000000000000000000000 Lizard Creek CHUM 00019450015036771% Questionable 915896000803000000000000000000000000000000000 Lizard Creek COHO 0000000 0 Questionable 400016500346000000000000000000000000000000000 Lockerby Creek PINK 3056 3004 605 502 0 7500 1752 1869 0% H Potentially Threatened 400016500346000000000000000000000000000000000 Lockerby Creek COHO 41 178 0 44 0 1500 63 67 0% H Potentially Threatened 400016500346000000000000000000000000000000000 Lockerby Creek CHUM 3 18 0 13 0 100 8 8 0% H Potentially Threatened 910740100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Lowe Inlet System SOCKEYE 3306 9020 7667 3300 2470 35000 5139 5841 42% S-3 Of Some Concern 910740100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Lowe Inlet System COHO 2833 5050 3375 1470 467 15000 2996 3191 15% M Potentially Threatened 400016500220000000000000000000000000000000000 Madeline Creek PINK 0 2333 40 2 0 7500 565 594 0% H Potentially Threatened 400016500220000000000000000000000000000000000 Madeline Creek CHUM 150 00001500 35 38 0% Questionable 400016500220000000000000000000000000000000000 Madeline Creek COHO 0 0 0 10 0 100 2 3 0% Questionable 915876300860000000000000000000000000000000000 Manzanita Cove Creek PINK 0 0 3600 2178 1121 20000 1214 1244 90% L Unthreatened 915876300860000000000000000000000000000000000 Manzanita Cove Creek COHO 0 0 29 0 0 200 5 6 0% Questionable 915560200463000000000000000000000000000000000 Markle Inlet Creek CHUM 695 413 788 798 953 5000 733 673 142% L Unthreatened 915560200463000000000000000000000000000000000 Markle Inlet Creek COHO 25 185 92 160 7 400 135 155 4% H Potentially Threatened 915560200463000000000000000000000000000000000 Markle Inlet Creek PINK 0 0 771 1011 483 3500 405 392 123% L Unthreatened 915483500360000000000000000000000000000000000 McDonald Creek CHUM 2400 138 68 165 0 3500 549 585 0% H Potentially Threatened

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 6 of 10 Background Report: Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix I: DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Mean (50- Historical % Hist. Stock Watershed Code Stream Name Species 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2001 Max Stock Status 01) Mean (50-89) Mean2 Classification

915483500360000000000000000000000000000000000 McDonald Creek COHO 975 173 171 80 0 7500 411 424 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500360000000000000000000000000000000000 McDonald Creek SOCKEYE 465 282 228 125 0 3500 300 322 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500360000000000000000000000000000000000 McDonald Creek PINK 663 575 625 58 0 2000 411 433 0% H Potentially Threatened 915538000243000000000000000000000000000000000 McMicking Creek CHUM 1656 200 1379 120 68 8000 769 909 7% H Potentially Threatened 915538000243000000000000000000000000000000000 McMicking Creek SOCKEYE 0001060 0 0% Questionable 915538000243000000000000000000000000000000000 McMicking Creek COHO 0 0 25 43 5 50 11 12 43% H Potentially Threatened 915538000243000000000000000000000000000000000 McMicking Creek PINK 107 300 292 128 50 1500 177 190 26% M Potentially Threatened 400018200000000000000000000000000000000000000 McNeil River COHO 0 0 0 175 125 250 18 11 1143% Questionable 400018200000000000000000000000000000000000000 McNeil River PINK 0 0 0 163 0 500 26 27 0% H Potentially Threatened 910807900000000000000000000000000000000000000 McNichol Creek PINK 1579 1811 411 3165 2700 13000 1908 1780 152% L Unthreatened 910807900000000000000000000000000000000000000 McNichol Creek COHO 0 189 0 75 50 1500 79 84 59% S-1 Of Some Concern 910807900000000000000000000000000000000000000 McNichol Creek CHUM 00045401 1488% Questionable 915560200237000000000000000000000000000000000 Mikado Lake System PINK 1225 409 2100 1310 1125 8000 1262 1284 88% L Unthreatened 915560200237000000000000000000000000000000000 Mikado Lake System SOCKEYE 2675 2500 1995 2070 2636 5500 2380 2310 114% L Unthreatened 915560200237000000000000000000000000000000000 Mikado Lake System COHO 885 722 150 156 70 1500 492 530 13% H Potentially Threatened 915560200237000000000000000000000000000000000 Mikado Lake System CHUM 338 163 225 24 0 1000 192 212 0% H Potentially Threatened 910724000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Missed Creek COHO 0 0 0 55 50 200 13 10 481% S-1 Of Some Concern 910724000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Missed Creek CHUM 0 0 0 18 15 50 4 2 720% Questionable 910724000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Missed Creek SOCKEYE 00002110 0 Questionable 910724000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Missed Creek PINK 0 0 0 1069 346 3000 250 225 154% L Unthreatened 9155602000670000000000000000000000000000000000 Monckton Inlet Creek SOCKEYE 700 542 17 50 1500 312 362 14% H Potentially Threatened 9155602000670000000000000000000000000000000000 Monckton Inlet Creek COHO 400 438 75 17 20 750 204 230 9% H Potentially Threatened 9155602000670000000000000000000000000000000000 Monckton Inlet Creek CHUM 254 50 50 3 0 750 89 103 0% H Potentially Threatened 9155602000670000000000000000000000000000000000 Monckton Inlet Creek PINK 267 250 250 733 40 2000 301 353 11% H Potentially Threatened 910779100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Moore Cove Creek PINK 46000 47750 26570 28250 50909 150000 40112 37143 137% L Unthreatened 910779100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Moore Cove Creek COHO 160 3067 690 9 7500 978 978 0% No Recent Records 910779100000000000000000000000000000000000000 Moore Cove Creek CHUM 250 500 250 Questionable 910890200000000000000000000000000000000000000 Mouse Creek PINK 0 0 0 450 5564 17000 1288 113 4945% L Unthreatened 910890200000000000000000000000000000000000000 Mouse Creek CHUM 21 40 21 Questionable 400016500374000000000000000000000000000000000 Muddy Creek PINK 390 60 0 0 0 3500 107 115 0% H Potentially Threatened 910908300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Nasoga Gulf Creek PINK 0 0 300 393 0 1000 121 133 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560200614000000000000000000000000000000000 Newcombe Harbour Cree PINK 347 1220 1980 2520 2342 9000 1737 1578 148% L Unthreatened 915560200614000000000000000000000000000000000 Newcombe Harbour Cree CHUM 547 390 118 371 68 1500 294 352 19% H Potentially Threatened 915560200614000000000000000000000000000000000 Newcombe Harbour Cree COHO 0 0 11 32 0 238 10 10 0% Questionable 915483500183000000000000000000000000000000000 Noble Creek COHO 1490 549 129 301 0 3500 688 710 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500183000000000000000000000000000000000 Noble Creek CHUM 2270 1270 533 1569 593 4000 1292 1402 42% M Potentially Threatened 915483500183000000000000000000000000000000000 Noble Creek SOCKEYE 265 233 0 0 0 1500 135 140 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500183000000000000000000000000000000000 Noble Creek PINK 928 259 168 103 86 3500 365 398 22% M Potentially Threatened 910773300000000000000000000000000000000000000 North Kumealon Creek PINK 6125 6795 3511 3444 2220 15000 4458 5047 44% S-3 Of Some Concern 910773300000000000000000000000000000000000000 North Kumealon Creek COHO 3 41 24 0 200 19 21 0% H Potentially Threatened 910758700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Northness Creek CHUM 0 0 0 73 68 300 25 18 372% S-1 Of Some Concern 910758700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Northness Creek PINK 0 0 0 610 1050 3500 270 153 689% L Unthreatened 915560200208000000000000000000000000000000000 Oar Point Creek CHUM 550 00002500 122 138 0% Questionable 915560200208000000000000000000000000000000000 Oar Point Creek COHO 300 00801500 70 79 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560200208000000000000000000000000000000000 Oar Point Creek PINK 450 0 0 0 167 1500 122 115 144% S-1 Of Some Concern 915789100270003270000000000000000000000000000 Oldfield Creek COHO 0 0 0 39 174 300 27 8 2119% S-1 Of Some Concern 915789100270003270000000000000000000000000000 Oldfield Creek CHUM 0 0 0 0 0 Questionable 915789100270003270000000000000000000000000000 Oldfield Creek PINK 0 0 0 35 5 50 2 2 229% Questionable 910939500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Olh Creek CHUM 0 0 175 48 0 800 42 46 0% H Potentially Threatened 910939500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Olh Creek COHO 0 0 0 25 0 100 6 6 0% H Potentially Threatened 910939500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Olh Creek PINK 0 0 13 5 0 50 2 3 0% Questionable 915765500923000000000000000000000000000000000 Oona River PINK 10225 4295 11270 12496 12583 50000 10266 9571 131% L Unthreatened 915765500923000000000000000000000000000000000 Oona River COHO 267 767 510 178 563 3500 445 432 130% L Unthreatened 915560200758000000000000000000000000000000000 Pa-Aat River PINK 6100 12310 5000 9550 13142 40000 9371 8240 159% L Unthreatened 915560200758000000000000000000000000000000000 Pa-Aat River COHO 1565 2623 116 354 110 3500 1158 1243 9% H Potentially Threatened 915560200758000000000000000000000000000000000 Pa-Aat River CHUM 560 331 44 72 120 1500 243 287 42% M Potentially Threatened

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 7 of 10 Background Report: Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix I: DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Mean (50- Historical % Hist. Stock Watershed Code Stream Name Species 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2001 Max Stock Status 01) Mean (50-89) Mean2 Classification

910582400000000000000000000000000000000000000 Paril River COHO 1064 488 125 245 199 2200 432 467 43% M Potentially Threatened 910582400000000000000000000000000000000000000 Paril River CHUM 372 817 342 50 17 1500 292 430 4% H Potentially Threatened 910582400000000000000000000000000000000000000 Paril River SOCKEYE 00002100 0 Questionable 910582400000000000000000000000000000000000000 Paril River PINK 600 219 508 755 496 3000 526 536 93% L Unthreatened 9158960003810000000000000000000000000000000000 Pearse Canal Creek PINK 0 0 600 0 0 6000 133 150 0% Questionable 910924000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Perry Bay Creek CHUM 0 0 250 61 259 2500 107 79 330% L Unthreatened 910924000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Perry Bay Creek PINK 00060251 1 0% Questionable 915765500335000000000000000000000000000000000 Phoenix Creek PINK 2565 2553 3475 2782 1621 10000 2653 2849 57% L Unthreatened 915765500335000000000000000000000000000000000 Phoenix Creek COHO 455 668 134 117 8 1500 337 375 2% H Potentially Threatened 915765500335000000000000000000000000000000000 Phoenix Creek CHUM 0 68 3 0 0 200 16 18 0% H Potentially Threatened 915765500286000000000000000000000000000000000 Porcher Creek PINK 4900 9390 3095 3565 4625 15000 5096 5238 88% L Unthreatened 915765500286000000000000000000000000000000000 Porcher Creek COHO 333 572 59 77 0 1500 272 299 0% H Potentially Threatened 915765500286000000000000000000000000000000000 Porcher Creek CHUM 03002251 1267% Questionable 915560200122000000000000000000000000000000000 Port Stephens Creek PINK 517 197 100 1336 483 3500 551 568 85% L Unthreatened 915560200122000000000000000000000000000000000 Port Stephens Creek COHO 2250 1633 63 290 120 3500 1114 1287 9% H Potentially Threatened 915560200122000000000000000000000000000000000 Port Stephens Creek CHUM 517 10 28 5 750 89 109 5% H Potentially Threatened 910791900343000000000000000000000000000000000 Prudhomme Creek SOCKEYE 0 0 0 253 1182 2500 307 53 2218% L Unthreatened 910791900343000000000000000000000000000000000 Prudhomme Creek COHO 0 0 0 19 670 2000 54 4 18363% L Unthreatened 910713900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Quaal River PINK 47750 334500 128500 141750 137417 1500000 157192 163125 84% L Unthreatened 910713900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Quaal River COHO 3525 7295 3400 6000 1308 25000 4608 5031 26% S-3 Of Some Concern 910713900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Quaal River CHUM 5300 6000 5400 16850 4208 65000 7423 8388 50% S-3 Of Some Concern 910713900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Quaal River SOCKEYE 390 2500 63 56 17 7500 472 560 3% H Potentially Threatened 910713900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Quaal River CHINOOK 260 400 0 1 3 400 104 122 2% H Potentially Threatened 915560000251000000000000000000000000000000000 Quitonsta Creek PINK 0 0 1230 33 325 12000 323 323 101% L Unthreatened 915560000251000000000000000000000000000000000 Quitonsta Creek COHO 3025 6375 1750 644 356 15000 2837 3105 11% M Potentially Threatened 915560000251000000000000000000000000000000000 Quitonsta Creek SOCKEYE 4100 5900 4675 3389 1775 15000 4047 4538 39% S-3 Of Some Concern 915560000251000000000000000000000000000000000 Quitonsta Creek CHUM 0 0 1244 0 3 8000 249 287 1% H Potentially Threatened 915560000515000000000000000000000000000000000 Rawlinson Creek PINK 1206 1098 3742 161 25 15000 1206 1345 2% H Potentially Threatened 915560000515000000000000000000000000000000000 Rawlinson Creek CHUM 1600 760 1843 506 28 5000 1087 1202 2% H Potentially Threatened 915560000515000000000000000000000000000000000 Rawlinson Creek COHO 0 200 292 0 1000 113 134 0% H Potentially Threatened 915566500138000000000000000000000000000000000 Riordan Creek PINK 1397 1750 324 1955 916 4600 1325 1475 62% L Unthreatened 915566500138000000000000000000000000000000000 Riordan Creek COHO 158 253 56 167 36 750 147 156 23% M Potentially Threatened 915566500138000000000000000000000000000000000 Riordan Creek CHUM 267 200 13 33 17 750 117 159 11% H Potentially Threatened 910983400000000000000000000000000000000000000 Roberson Creek PINK 8 728 398 1185 188 5500 480 524 36% M Potentially Threatened 910983400000000000000000000000000000000000000 Roberson Creek CHUM 425 1313 98 2 0 3500 526 565 0% H Potentially Threatened 910983400000000000000000000000000000000000000 Roberson Creek COHO 0 82 63 0 0 400 29 33 0% H Potentially Threatened 915742200933000000000000000000000000000000000 Ryan Creek PINK 3956 5610 4350 3022 2644 15000 3990 4274 62% L Unthreatened 915742200933000000000000000000000000000000000 Ryan Creek SOCKEYE 1215 240 55 6 3500 480 556 1% H Potentially Threatened 915742200933000000000000000000000000000000000 Ryan Creek CHUM 1067 500 83 44 1 3500 449 492 0% H Potentially Threatened 915742200933000000000000000000000000000000000 Ryan Creek COHO 988 572 60 41 68 1500 400 443 15% H Potentially Threatened 910960200000000000000000000000000000000000000 Salmon Cove Creek PINK 0 0 944 3944 1188 9000 1163 1158 103% L Unthreatened 910960200000000000000000000000000000000000000 Salmon Cove Creek COHO 0 0 0 21 0 100 4 4 0% Questionable 915483500541000000000000000000000000000000000 Salmon Creek PINK 1043 850 0 42 0 3500 587 612 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500541000000000000000000000000000000000 Salmon Creek COHO 3075 2800 0 13 0 7500 1724 1793 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500541000000000000000000000000000000000 Salmon Creek SOCKEYE 325 178 0 0 0 750 115 135 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500541000000000000000000000000000000000 Salmon Creek CHUM 450 307 13 25 6 750 254 276 2% H Potentially Threatened 915823500634000000000000000000000000000000000 Sandy Bay Creek PINK 0 0 0 4100 4428 20000 1765 946 468% L Unthreatened 915823500634000000000000000000000000000000000 Sandy Bay Creek CHUM 0 0 0 11 63 100 8 3 2438% S-1 Of Some Concern 915823500634000000000000000000000000000000000 Sandy Bay Creek COHO 00030201 1 0% Questionable 400057000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Scotia River PINK 1450 12953 3720 11750 1360 100000 6677 7358 18% S-3 Of Some Concern 400057000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Scotia River COHO 0 0 80 143 0 500 44 49 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500283000000000000000000000000000000000 Sentinel Creek COHO 855 558 167 35 0 1500 505 525 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500283000000000000000000000000000000000 Sentinel Creek CHUM 555 465 16 82 0 3500 315 327 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500283000000000000000000000000000000000 Sentinel Creek SOCKEYE 493 533 0 33 0 1500 274 284 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500283000000000000000000000000000000000 Sentinel Creek PINK 343 435 281 18 0 1500 263 274 0% H Potentially Threatened 915742200878000000000000000000000000000000000 Shaw Creek PINK 2905 4860 3788 5100 6913 20000 4798 4163 166% L Unthreatened

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 8 of 10 Background Report: Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix I: DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Mean (50- Historical % Hist. Stock Watershed Code Stream Name Species 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2001 Max Stock Status 01) Mean (50-89) Mean2 Classification

915742200878000000000000000000000000000000000 Shaw Creek COHO 395 575 50 278 322 1500 333 334 96% L Unthreatened 915742200878000000000000000000000000000000000 Shaw Creek CHUM 675 448 69 58 3 1800 325 364 1% H Potentially Threatened 910797600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Shawatlan Creek SOCKEYE 3270 2950 845 2586 1542 6000 2204 2408 64% L Unthreatened 910797600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Shawatlan Creek COHO 13 1300 400 300 863 3500 495 438 197% L Unthreatened 910797600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Shawatlan Creek CHINOOK 0 26 11 0 200 11 12 0% Questionable 910797600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Shawatlan Creek CHUM 200 0 3 200 30 67 4% Questionable 910797600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Shawatlan Creek PINK 700 238 393 280 2000 429 487 58% L Unthreatened 915560200790000000000000000000000000000000000 Sheneeza Creek PINK 0 0 550 17 24 4000 148 166 14% H Potentially Threatened 915560200790000000000000000000000000000000000 Sheneeza Creek SOCKEYE 280 390 1150 75 95 4500 451 506 19% H Potentially Threatened 915560200790000000000000000000000000000000000 Sheneeza Creek CHUM 44 205 261 39 100 1000 138 144 69% S-1 Of Some Concern 915560200790000000000000000000000000000000000 Sheneeza Creek COHO 0 0 160 6 2 700 23 27 7% Questionable 910801300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Silver Creek PINK 1504 1285 468 2726 3040 13000 1804 1496 203% L Unthreatened 910801300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Silver Creek CHUM 1046 100 50 13 13 6000 414 462 3% H Potentially Threatened 910801300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Silver Creek COHO 21 190 0 92 18 1500 85 95 18% H Potentially Threatened 910801300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Silver Creek CHINOOK 0000040 0 0% Questionable 915560000469000000000000000000000000000000000 Skull Creek PINK 3903 825 4188 909 128 20000 2287 2541 5% H Potentially Threatened 915560000469000000000000000000000000000000000 Skull Creek CHUM 1820 711 1563 525 23 6000 1090 1209 2% H Potentially Threatened 915560000469000000000000000000000000000000000 Skull Creek COHO 0 208 136 0 1500 98 112 0% H Potentially Threatened 915765500359000000000000000000000000000000000 Snass Creek PINK 173 110 80 565 233 3100 232 232 101% L Unthreatened 915765500359000000000000000000000000000000000 Snass Creek COHO 288 336 83 99 3 750 193 224 1% H Potentially Threatened 400016500398000000000000000000000000000000000 Sparkling Creek PINK 967 95 30 1 0 5000 267 288 0% H Potentially Threatened 400016500398000000000000000000000000000000000 Sparkling Creek CHUM 293 00002500 70 75 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560000695000000000000000000000000000000000 Spencer Creek PINK 179 433 788 180 64 3500 355 408 16% H Potentially Threatened 915560000695000000000000000000000000000000000 Spencer Creek SOCKEYE 700 390 388 0 117 1500 288 326 36% M Potentially Threatened 915560000695000000000000000000000000000000000 Spencer Creek COHO 425 485 94 21 0 1500 241 284 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560000695000000000000000000000000000000000 Spencer Creek CHUM 150 128 25 0 0 750 78 93 0% H Potentially Threatened 915765500878000000000000000000000000000000000 Spiller River PINK 8350 3150 3165 2980 4785 40000 4486 4411 108% L Unthreatened 915765500878000000000000000000000000000000000 Spiller River COHO 0 185 0 0 1500 64 64 0% No Recent Records 910919700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Stagoo Creek PINK 593 2561 4665 9540 4125 30000 4324 4385 94% L Unthreatened 910919700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Stagoo Creek CHUM 10725 9970 13350 4960 10091 70000 9825 9751 103% L Unthreatened 910919700000000000000000000000000000000000000 Stagoo Creek COHO 0 0 89 171 0 600 51 56 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500627000050000000000000000000000000000 Stannard Creek PINK 13200 3840 4995 5083 9459 59000 7178 6779 140% L Unthreatened 915483500627000050000000000000000000000000000 Stannard Creek COHO 4425 1931 153 218 125 7500 1672 1756 7% H Potentially Threatened 915483500627000050000000000000000000000000000 Stannard Creek CHUM 6300 1175 67 480 255 7500 1940 2221 11% M Potentially Threatened 915483500627000050000000000000000000000000000 Stannard Creek SOCKEYE 1550 357 0 107 2 3500 507 568 0% H Potentially Threatened 915563500554000000000000000000000000000000000 Stewart Creek PINK 1350 4635 1500 2750 3428 15000 2829 2635 130% L Unthreatened 915563500554000000000000000000000000000000000 Stewart Creek CHUM 2465 1125 2500 960 227 15000 1408 1763 13% M Potentially Threatened 915563500554000000000000000000000000000000000 Stewart Creek COHO 475 893 75 101 33 1500 422 473 7% H Potentially Threatened 910828500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Stumaun Creek PINK 833 1585 5056 7833 5642 15000 4226 3766 150% L Unthreatened 910828500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Stumaun Creek COHO 0 75 0 3 0 750 20 21 0% Questionable 910828500000000000000000000000000000000000000 Stumaun Creek CHUM 05000501 1 0% Questionable 915560200822000000000000000000000000000000000 Three Mile Creek CHUM 350 1850 363 50 20 3500 327 469 4% H Potentially Threatened 915560200822000000000000000000000000000000000 Three Mile Creek SOCKEYE 575 575 300 0 0 750 236 325 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560200822000000000000000000000000000000000 Three Mile Creek COHO 1125 494 113 21 0 1500 220 269 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560200822000000000000000000000000000000000 Three Mile Creek PINK 350 488 264 500 358 1000 375 382 94% L Unthreatened 910855600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Toon River PINK 8538 11667 6778 5443 10125 35000 8546 8047 126% L Unthreatened 910855600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Toon River CHUM 10590 7400 4650 4140 4958 40000 6294 6695 74% L Unthreatened 910855600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Toon River COHO 416 683 669 89 0 2500 447 462 0% H Potentially Threatened 910855600000000000000000000000000000000000000 Toon River SOCKEYE 0000020 0 0% Questionable 915876300940000000000000000000000000000000000 Tracy Creek PINK 156 463 3855 1228 1632 10000 1311 1190 137% L Unthreatened 915876300940000000000000000000000000000000000 Tracy Creek CHUM 50 00002006 6 0% Questionable 915876300940000000000000000000000000000000000 Tracy Creek COHO 75 0000754 5 0% Questionable 910835200000000000000000000000000000000000000 Trail Bay Creek PINK 0 0 0 11 0 100 2 3 0% Questionable 915483500572000000000000000000000000000000000 Treneman Creek PINK 400 775 240 91 25 1500 270 299 8% H Potentially Threatened 915483500572000000000000000000000000000000000 Treneman Creek COHO 265 460 589 107 75 2000 360 375 20% H Potentially Threatened 915483500572000000000000000000000000000000000 Treneman Creek CHUM 380 44 37 105 8 1500 169 180 4% H Potentially Threatened

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 9 of 10 Background Report: Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix I: DFO Salmon Escapement Database

Mean (50- Historical % Hist. Stock Watershed Code Stream Name Species 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2001 Max Stock Status 01) Mean (50-89) Mean2 Classification

915483500572000000000000000000000000000000000 Treneman Creek SOCKEYE 00270252 2 0% Questionable 910881000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Tsampanaknok Bay Cree PINK 0 0 89 52 1209 4500 338 29 4146% L Unthreatened 910881000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Tsampanaknok Bay Cree COHO 00020200 1 0% Questionable 915560200879000000000000000000000000000000000 Tsimtack Lake System PINK 313 1733 521 1644 1840 7000 1221 1062 173% L Unthreatened 915560200879000000000000000000000000000000000 Tsimtack Lake System COHO 1710 2115 181 413 138 7500 1190 1321 10% H Potentially Threatened 915560200879000000000000000000000000000000000 Tsimtack Lake System SOCKEYE 1385 1675 1150 3100 2440 10000 2072 1971 124% L Unthreatened 915560200879000000000000000000000000000000000 Tsimtack Lake System CHUM 1413 2115 542 478 179 7500 1022 1245 14% H Potentially Threatened 915876300632000000000000000000000000000000000 Turk Creek PINK 93 0 714 540 138 5000 294 314 44% M Potentially Threatened 915876300632000000000000000000000000000000000 Turk Creek COHO 75 200 0 0 200 25 31 0% Questionable 915876300632000000000000000000000000000000000 Turk Creek CHUM 0 0 0 22 0 200 6 6 0% Questionable 915541700294000000000000000000000000000000000 Turn Creek PINK 8000 10855 4150 22485 18850 60000 13098 11373 166% L Unthreatened 915541700294000000000000000000000000000000000 Turn Creek CHUM 8975 1720 769 1376 277 35000 2690 3408 8% M Potentially Threatened 915541700294000000000000000000000000000000000 Turn Creek COHO 6 463 50 217 30 1500 183 188 16% H Potentially Threatened 915541700294000000000000000000000000000000000 Turn Creek SOCKEYE 2 3 2 Questionable 915541700450000000000000000000000000000000000 Turtle Creek PINK 3836 1669 6200 17750 18642 43000 10424 7685 243% L Unthreatened 915541700450000000000000000000000000000000000 Turtle Creek CHUM 364 163 431 524 150 2500 302 356 42% M Potentially Threatened 915541700450000000000000000000000000000000000 Turtle Creek COHO 4 0 0 64 250 22 22 0% No Recent Records 915560200956000000000000000000000000000000000 Tuwartz Creek PINK 510 1113 488 323 667 3500 670 670 99% L Unthreatened 915560200956000000000000000000000000000000000 Tuwartz Creek CHUM 398 210 25 33 32 1500 219 241 13% H Potentially Threatened 915560200956000000000000000000000000000000000 Tuwartz Creek COHO 208 248 63 8 400 176 189 4% H Potentially Threatened 915560200956000000000000000000000000000000000 Tuwartz Creek SOCKEYE 0 0 0 22 0 100 5 5 0% Questionable 500016300000000000000000000000000000000000000 Welda Creek PINK 0 0 0 2235 615 10000 569 559 110% L Unthreatened 915483500712000000000000000000000000000000000 West Creek (Aristazabal PINK 1665 760 2590 425 402 7800 1133 1209 33% M Potentially Threatened 915483500712000000000000000000000000000000000 West Creek (Aristazabal COHO 1440 303 0 95 3 3500 478 506 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500712000000000000000000000000000000000 West Creek (Aristazabal CHUM 1080 1067 68 90 3 3500 556 601 0% H Potentially Threatened 915483500712000000000000000000000000000000000 West Creek (Aristazabal SOCKEYE 598 109 20 44 0 1500 219 226 0% H Potentially Threatened 915765500141000000000000000000000000000000000 West Creek (Porcher) PINK 3203 1859 850 825 1637 18000 1920 2014 81% L Unthreatened 915765500141000000000000000000000000000000000 West Creek (Porcher) COHO 200 250 30 2 400 153 187 1% H Potentially Threatened 915823500677000000000000000000000000000000000 Whitley Point Creek PINK 0 0 222 1701 2978 10000 966 422 706% L Unthreatened 910929900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Wilauks Creek PINK 0 0 1085 2415 3255 8500 1388 875 372% L Unthreatened 910929900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Wilauks Creek CHUM 0 0 630 369 577 4000 320 247 234% L Unthreatened 910929900000000000000000000000000000000000000 Wilauks Creek COHO 0 0 0 406 0 3000 81 86 0% H Potentially Threatened 915560200420000000000000000000000000000000000 Wilson Creek PINK 0 0 2071 1230 300 7000 717 798 38% M Potentially Threatened 915560200420000000000000000000000000000000000 Wilson Creek CHUM 1070 1328 1685 2380 751 5000 1443 1616 46% M Potentially Threatened 915560200420000000000000000000000000000000000 Wilson Creek COHO 0 0 28 21 0 200 10 11 0% H Potentially Threatened 915541700040000000000000000000000000000000000 Windy Island Creek PINK 569 333 863 1320 1908 5500 878 794 240% L Unthreatened 915541700040000000000000000000000000000000000 Windy Island Creek CHUM 588 222 389 98 184 2000 307 319 58% S-1 Of Some Concern 915541700040000000000000000000000000000000000 Windy Island Creek COHO 0 0 4 78 0 200 21 23 0% H Potentially Threatened 915765500175000000000000000000000000000000000 Wolf Creek PINK 6050 9060 6041 6900 4233 30000 6371 7013 60% L Unthreatened 915765500175000000000000000000000000000000000 Wolf Creek COHO 00340341 2 0% Questionable

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 10 of 10

Appendix II. Resident Fish Species Database

Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix II: Freshwater Fish Database CCG LAM SCU ADV CAS ACT CAL TSB STB MW KO RB DV EU CT RL ST Stream or Lake Merge PL Name Watershed Code Area Unique Recreation Vulnerable Explanation Reviewer Comments Reference Y Y Steelhead (WBC); Recreational -flux in Pink numbers may be a fishing natural phenomenon for this system Johnston Creek 400-016500-50000- AREA 6 Y Y Y Kwinitsa River 400-066100- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead (WBC) FISS; Bart Proctor Lockerby Creek 400-016500-34600- AREA 6 Y Y Y Steelhead (WBC) FISS Y Y Y Eulachon; Spring run steelhead -concern over heavy logging/timber (WBC). Recreational fishing and extraction pressures could put local viewing. Large river system. Class stocks at higher risk Ecstall River 400-016500- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y II water FISS Y Y Y Largest steelhead fishery in the NC (WLAP, WBC, LK); Recreational fishing; Steelhead vulnerable to ove fishing due to easy access (WLAP) FISS; FISS Update; Bart Kloiya River 910-791900- AREA 4 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Proctor Y Y Steelhead (NCSI, WBC, LK) Diana Creek 910-791900-23400- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Recreational fishing FISS; Bart Proctor Y Y Steelhead (WBC, LK). Guiding -pressures put on Coho and Spring due to logging a concern; -believe logging 15-20 years ago destroyed Ensheshese River 910-863100- AREA 3 Y Y Y spawning beds FISS; FISS Update Y Y Steelhead (WBC, LK); Shoreline- -large subspecies of Rainbow Trout spawning kokanee ; Khtada Lake: Blue ribbon fishery for Rainbow 400-059300-00000- AREA 6 trout, 300,000+ shoreline spawning kokanoo, research site, surrounded by unstable terrains. FISS; FISS Update; Triton Khtada Creek Y Y YYY Stream Inventory Report Y Y Shoreline-spawning kokanee ; Khtada Lake: Blue ribbon fishery for Rainbow trout, 300,000+ shoreline 400-059300-00000- AREA 6 Y spawning kokanoo, research site, surrounded by unstable terrains. Khtada Lake YYY FISS Y Y Steelhead (WBC, LK); Wildlife -concern over low Chinook numbers viewing related to salmon runs. Displacement potential and 910-887500- AREA 6 increased mortality risk to Grizzly as a consequence of human use. Khutzeymateen River YY YY FISS; FISS Update Y Y Eulachon run, steelhead (WBC, LK) -big Stlhd and eulachon runs FISS; FISS Update; Bart Khyex River 400-036100- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Proctor Y Y Steelhead (NCSI) Recreational fishing and wildlife viewing. Displacement potential and increased mortality risk to Grizzly as a consequence of human use. FISS; FISS Update; Bart Kitsault River 910-930200- AREA 5 Y Y Y Y Y Proctor Y Y Spring run steelhead (WBC, LK); -presence of Cutthroat and Dolly Recreational fishing, guiding; Class Varden II water; spring run steelhead. Displacement potential and increased mortality risk to Grizzly as a consequence of human use. Kwinamass River 910-896600- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update Viewing of salmon ascending -High Sockeye, Coho, and trout Lowe Inlet System 910-740100- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y falls at inlet numbers FISS Union Creek -large Rainbow Trout and Kokanee LRMP Sector Comment; 910-871900 AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Union Lake recreational fishing Sockeye FISS Y Y Steelhead (NCSI, WBC, LK) - summer run. Marine blue clays, limited offchannel habitat on floodplain, steelhead vulnerable to FISS; FISS Update; Bart Chambers Creek 500-009000- AREA 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y overfishing (WLAP) Proctor Karst geologies, potentially open -big Pink run systems with vulnerable to FISS; FISS Update; Triton Kumealon Creek 910-768900- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y ground disturbance Stream Inventory Report Triumph Creek Y Y Summer-run steelhead (WLAP, WBC); Vulnerable to over-fishing 910-584500- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y (WLAP) FISS Update Alpha Creek 915-560200-69000- AREA 5 Y Y Steelhead -strong Pink run No Info FISS Antigonish Creek 400-032400- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead (WBC, LK) Bart Proctor Arden Creek 400-036100-232 AREA 6 Y Y Steelhead FISS

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 1 of 6 Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix II: Freshwater Fish Database CCG LAM SCU ADV CAS ACT CAL TSB STB MW KO RB DV EU CT RL ST Stream or Lake Merge PL Name Watershed Code Area Unique Recreation Vulnerable Explanation Reviewer Comments Reference Big Bay Creek 910-503100- AREA 4 YYY Y Steelhead (NCSI) Bart Proctor Big Falls Creek 400-016500-24200- AREA 4 Y Y Y Steelhead FISS Big Useless Creek 915-765500-70200- AREA 4 Y Y Steelhead No info FISS -strong runs of Sea-run Cutthroat Captain Cove Creek 915-560200-66500- AREA 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead and Steelhead FISS, FISS Update Crow Lagoon Creek 910-878500- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS Update -Sockeye, trout, Stlhd, Coho, and Deadman Creek 915-560000-58800- AREA 6 Y Y Steelhead Pink No info FISS FISS; FISS Update; Bart Denise Creek 910-793700- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead Proctor Diana Lake 910-791900-23400- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS Update

Dogfish Bay Creek 910-971500- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS Update; Bart Proctor Foote Creek 915-765500-24200- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS Hayward Creek 400-016500-14100- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS; FISS Update -Pink, Coho, and Stlhd, supports Hevenor Inlet Creek 915-560200-53500- AREA 6 Y Y Steelhead many fish 7 matches in FISS Illiance River 910-929800- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS; Bart Proctor Inver Creek 400-031400- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Steelhead (NCSI) Bart Proctor Y Steelhead (NCSI) Keesil Creek 910-727100- AREA 5 Y Y Y No info FISS; Bart Proctor Kiltuish River 910-593300- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS; FISS Update Y Steelhead (NCSI, LK) Kiskosh Creek 910-721600- AREA 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y No info FISS; Bart Proctor Y Steelhead (NCSI) FISS, FISS Update; Bart Kitkiata Creek 910-713300- AREA 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Proctor Y Steelhead (WBC, LK); Important -indicator system for FOC/DFO assessment stream for DFO and MELP; the only enumeration stream Lachmach River 910-846300- AREA 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y for steelhead in NC FISS; FISS Update -Pink present, low Coho numbers (just like Big Useless Creek) Little Useless Creek 915-765500-69000- AREA 3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS; FISS Update Lost Creek Unknown AREA 4 YY Y Steelhead (NCSI) NCSI McNeil River 400-018200- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead (NCSI) FISS; Bart Proctor Y Steelhead (NCSI) -Confirm Stlhd presence; -also presence of Pink, Dolly Varden, FISS; FISS Update; Bart McNichol Creek 910-807900- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Cutthroat Proctor Y Steelhead (NCSI) FISS; FISS Update; Bart Moore Cove Creek 910-779100 AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Proctor Muddy Creek 400-016500-37400- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS; FISS Update Nasoga Gulf Creek 910-908300- AREA 6 Y Y Steelhead No match FISS -most species of salmon FISS; FISS Update; Bart Oona River 915-765500-92300- AREA 4 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead Proctor Y Sea-run cutthroat (WLAP, LK); sea run cutthroat reported by M. FISS; FISS Update; Bart Pa-Aat River 915-560200-45800- AREA 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y Lambyorksi Proctor Porcher Creek 915-765500-28600- AREA 3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS; Bart Proctor Y Steelhead (NCSI, LK); Exceptional -eagle info should be included with eagle concentrations during salmon a “Wildlife Info” column runs (WLAP) Quaal River 910-713900- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y FISS Update; Bart Proctor Quitonsta Creek 915-560000-25100- AREA 5 Y Y Anadromous Cutthroat No match FISS Salmon Cove Creek 910-960200- AREA 6 Y Y Y Steelhead FISS FISS Update; FISS; aka Salter Lake Creek 915-560200-82200- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead Three Mile Creek Scotia River 400-057000- AREA 3 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead -Stlhd present FISS ; FISS Update -presence of Sockeye, Coho, Stlhd No match FISS; FISS Shawatlan Creek 910-797600- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead Update; Bart Proctor -restoration work done to mitigate FISS, FISS Update; Bart Silver Creek 910-801300- AREA 5 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead past logging impacts Proctor Stagoo Creek 910-919700- AREA 3 Y Y Y Y Steelhead (NCSI) -walked by DFO (data source?) FISS; Bart Proctor -walked by DFO (data source?) FISS; FISS Update; Bart Stumaun Creek 910-828500- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead Proctor Unnamed Creek 910-713900-036 AREA 6 Y Y Y Steelhead FISS Update Verney Pass Creek 915-567300-75400- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS Update Whitewater Creek 910-713900-03600- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Steelhead FISS Update Toon River 910-855600- AREA 6 Y Y Y Steelhead (WBC) FISS; FISS Update Tracy Creek 915-876300-09400- AREA 6 Y Y Steelhead No info FISS

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 2 of 6 Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix II: Freshwater Fish Database CCG LAM SCU ADV CAS ACT CAL TSB STB MW KO RB DV EU CT RL ST Stream or Lake Merge PL Name Watershed Code Area Unique Recreation Vulnerable Explanation Reviewer Comments Reference -presence of Sockeye, concern dam built by Skeena Cellulose may have prevented smolt migration Prudhomme Creek 910-791900-27100- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Recreational fishing FISS; Bart Proctor Aberdeen Creek 400-025100- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Bart Proctor Alder Creek 400-082800- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Angler Cove Creek 910-564100- AREA 6 No Info FISS FISS Update; Triton Lake Angler Cove Lake 910-564100- AREA 6 Y YYY Inventory Report Ayton Creek 400-045500- AREA 6 Y Y FISS, FISS Update Banks Lakes Creek 915-560000-25100- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Belle Bay Creek 910-979300- AREA 3 No info FISS Belowe Creek 910-736000- AREA 5 Y FISS FISS Update; Triton Lake Belowe Lake 910-736000- AREA 6 YY Y YY Inventory Report Big Tillhorn River 915-567300-19100- AREA 6 Y FISS, FISS Update Bill Creek 910-850400- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y FISS Update FISS; Triton Lake Bill Lake 910-850400- AREA 6 Y YYY Inventory Report Billy Creek 915-765500-06000- AREA 5 Y Y No info FISS Blackrock Creek 915-541700-21300- AREA 6 No info FISS Bluff Creek Unknown AREA 5 Y FISS Update Bolton Creek 915-560000-75100- AREA 6 No info Bonilla Arm Creek 915-560000-37600- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Borrowman Creek 915-483500-62700- AREA 6 -Coho and Chum present No info FISS Bremner (North) -concern over decline of Coho Creek 915-784000-82100- AREA 6 Y Y Bart Proctor Bremner Lake 915-784000-82100- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update Bridge Creek 910-849600- Y FISS Update Brown Creek 400-016500-15700- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Brown Lake 400-016500-15700- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Brundige Creek 915-823500-51800- AREA 6 No info FISS Camp Creek 910-643000- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update FISS Update; Triton Lake Caponero Lake 910-716300- AREA 6 Y Y Y Inventory Report Cartwright Creek 915-538000-17600- AREA 5 No info FISS Cherry Creek 915-560200-97200- AREA 6 No info FISS Chismore Creek 915-765500-86900- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y FISS; Bart Proctor Triton Lake Inventory Chute Lake 915-566500-13800- AREA 6 Y Y Y Reports Clifford Creek 915-483500-35000- AREA 6 No info FISS Cornwall River Unknown AREA 4 Y Y FISS Update Crab River 910-644700- AREA 3 Y Y Y FISS; FISS Update Crane Bay Creek 915-541700-30600- AREA 3 No info FISS Cridge Inlet Creek 915-560200-93500- AREA 3 Y FISS Curtis Inlet Creek 915-560200-34300- AREA 3 Y Y Y No match FISS Devil Creek 915-483500-72100- AREA 6 No info FISS -big Sockeye and trout, likely Stlhd. Devon Lake System 915-560200-24900- AREA 6 Y Y FISS; FISS Update Don Creek 915-483500-97900- AREA 5 No info FISS Donahue Creek 910-985000- AREA 5 Y FISS; FISS Update Donaldson Creek 915-560000-71700- Y Y Y FISS Update Duffey Creek 915-483500-15800- AREA 5 No info FISS Eagle Creek 915-483500- AREA 6 No info FISS East Gribbell Creek Unknown AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update -strong trout and Coho End Hill Creek 915-560000-62900- AREA 6 Y Y No info FISS; FISS Update False Stewart Creek 915-560200-74200- AREA 3 No info FISS Farrant Creek Unknown Y Y FISS Update FISS Update; a.k.a. Fishtrap Bay Creek 915-567300-78100- AREA 6 Y Cheenis Creek Flewin Creek 500-010700- AREA 6 Y Y FISS; FISS Update Flux Creek 915-483500-35100- AREA 6 No info FISS Fortune Creek 910-846100- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Freda Lake 910-748900- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Fury Creek 915-483500-86200- AREA 6 No info FISS Georgetown Creek 910-823300- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Georgie River 910-991800- AREA 6 Y FISS; FISS Update Gil Creek 915-541700-87800- AREA 4 No info FISS

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 3 of 6 Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix II: Freshwater Fish Database CCG LAM SCU ADV CAS ACT CAL TSB STB MW KO RB DV EU CT RL ST Stream or Lake Merge PL Name Watershed Code Area Unique Recreation Vulnerable Explanation Reviewer Comments Reference -high importance to all user groups Goat River 910-565700- AREA 3 Y Y Y FISS, FISS Update Grenville Channel Unknown AREA 5 Y Y Y FISS Update -in some years, very strong runs of 2 matches in FISS; No info Hankin Creek 915-742200-43300- AREA 6 Y Pink and Cutthroat on either

Hartley Bay Creek 910-728100- AREA 6 No info FISS; FISS Update Triton Lake Inventory Hartley Bay Lake 910-728100-00000- AREA 6 Y YYY Reports FISS; FISS Update; Bart Hays Creek 915-789100-27000- AREA 6 Y Y Proctor Hayward Lake 400-016500-14100- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update Head Creek 915-765500-18600- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y FISS; Bart Proctor Hotspring Creek 910-637900- AREA 6 No info FISS -Abundant salmon and trout species Humpback Creek 915-765500-82600- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS; Bart Proctor Hunts Creek 915-765500-76800- AREA 6 Y Y Y -Pinks?? FISS

Indian Harbour Creek 915-560000-20600- AREA 6 Y Y No info FISS; FISS Update -flux in Pink number may be a natural phenomenon for this system Johnston Lake 400-016500-50000- AREA 5 Y Y Y FISS; FISS Update Kdelmashan Creek 915-483500-19900- AREA 5 No info FISS Keecha Creek 915-560000-80400- AREA 5 No info FISS Kenzuwash Creeks 915-560000-04600- AREA 6 No info FISS FISS Update; Triton Lake Kergin Lake 910-791900- AREA 6 Y Inventory Report Keswar Creek 915-742200-32600- AREA 6 -big Pink run No info FISS Kihess Creek 910-711600- AREA 6 No match FISS Kilpatrick Lake 915-560200-66500- Y Y FISS Update Kingkown Inlet System 915-560000-37600- AREA 5 No match in FISS Kitkatla Creek 915-765500-37000- AREA 5 No info FISS Klewnuggit Inlet -major Coho and Moose Creek 910-748900- AREA 5 Y FISS Update -drains into large lake system that supports Chum, Sockeye, Coho, Kooryet Creek 915-560000-78400- AREA 4 and Pinks No info FISS Kshwan River 910-941800- AREA 4 Y FISS; FISS Update Kubas Creek 915-560200-72200- AREA 5 Y Y Y Bart Proctor Kumealon Lake 910-768900-01000- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Kumeon Bay Creek 910-876800- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Kxngeal Creek 910-751000- AREA 5 No match La Hou Creek 910-825400- AREA 5 Y Y Y FISS; Bart Proctor Lachmach Lake 910-846300-44700- AREA 5 Y FISS Update Lagoon Creek 915-486500-05300- AREA 5 No info FISS Larch Creek 910-886100- AREA 4 No info FISS Leverson Lake -large Rainbow Trout System 910-847300- AREA 4 Y Y Y Y FISS; FISS Update Lewis Creek 915-560000-14400- AREA 4 No info FISS Limestone Creek 915-483500-83800- AREA 4 No info FISS Linnea Creek 915-483500-13200- AREA 4 No info FISS Little Tillhorn River 915-567300-16200- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Lizard Creek 915-896000-80300- AREA 3 -small Pink run No match FISS Lowe Lake Y FISS Update; Triton Lake 910-740100- AREA 6 YYY YY Inventory Report Lower Lake 400-016500-62000- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update

Madeline Creek 400-016500-22000- AREA 6 No info FISS; FISS Update Manzanita Cove Creek 915-876300-86000- AREA 6 No info FISS Marigonish Creek 400-032600- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Bart Proctor Marion Creek 910-849700- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Marion Lake 910-849700- AREA 6 Y FISS Update -presence of Pinks, Coho, and Markle Inlet Creek 915-560200-46300- AREA 3 Chum No info FISS Masoga Gulf Creek 910-900800- AREA 6 Y FISS Update -presence of Pinks, Coho, and McDonald Creek 915-483500-36000- AREA 3 Chum No info FISS

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 4 of 6 Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix II: Freshwater Fish Database CCG LAM SCU ADV CAS ACT CAL TSB STB MW KO RB DV EU CT RL ST Stream or Lake Merge PL Name Watershed Code Area Unique Recreation Vulnerable Explanation Reviewer Comments Reference McMicking Creek 915-538000-24300- AREA 6 No info FISS McShane Creek 910-857000- AREA 6 Y FISS Update -presence of Sockeye, Chum, and Pinks, very likely to have Stlhd as Mikado Lake System 915-560200-23700- AREA 6 Y Y well No match FISS Triton Lake Inventory Minerva Lake 400-018200-02000- AREA 6 Y Reports Missed Creek 910-724000- AREA 6 Y FISS Mitt Lake 400-016500-37400- AREA 6 Y FISS Update -presence of Pink and Coho Monckton Inlet Creek 915-560200-06700- AREA 6 No match FISS Morse Creek 915-789100-20400- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Mouse Creek 910-890200- AREA 6 No info FISS Neaxtoalk Creek 910-829100- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Newcombe Harbour -does have fish Creek 915-560200-61400- AREA 6 3 matches in FISS Noble Creek 915-483500-18300- AREA 6 No info FISS North Kumealon -same as other Kumealon Creek Creek 910-769900- AREA 6 No info FISS Northness Creek 910-758700- AREA 4 No info FISS Oar Point Creek 915-560200-20800- AREA 4 No info FISS Oldfield Creek 915-789100-27000-32700- AREA 4 Y Y Y No match FISS Olh Creek 910-939500- AREA 4 No info FISS

Paril River 910-582400- AREA 5 Y No info FISS, FISS Update Pearse Canal Creek 915-896000-38100- AREA 5 No match FISS Perry Bay Creek 910-924000- AREA 3 Y Y FISS -presence of Pinks Phoenix Creek 915-765500-33500- AREA 3 Y Y Y No info FISS; Bart Proctor -presence of Pinks, Coho, and Port Stephens Creek 915-560200-12200- AREA 3 Y Y Y Y Y Stlhd FISS Rae Lake 400-016500-37400- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Rainbow Lake 910-791900-23400- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update Rawlinson Creek 915-560000-51500- AREA 5 No info FISS

Riordan Creek 915-566500-58300- AREA 5 Y Y No info FISS; Bart Proctor Roberson Creek 910-983400- AREA 6 No info FISS Ryan Creek 915-742200-93300- AREA 6 No info FISS Salmon Creek 915-483500-54100- AREA 6 No info FISS Salt Lagoon Creek 915-765500-21900- AREA 6 Y Y Y Y Y Bart Proctor FISS Update; Triton Lake Salter Lake 915-560200-82200- AREA 6 Y YYY Inventory Report Sandy Bay Creek 915-823500-63400- AREA 6 No info FISS Scoular Lake 915-560200-66500- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Sentinel Creek 915-483500-28300- AREA 6 No info FISS Serres Creek 915-560200-66200- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update

Shaw Creek 915-742200-87800- AREA 6 Y Y Y No info FISS; Bart Proctor Sheneeza Creek 915-560200-39100- AREA 5 No info FISS Showgirl Creek 915-560200-66300- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update Simpson Lake 910-740100-04500- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update Skene Cove Creek 915-765500-98600 AREA 6 Y Y Y Bart Proctor Skull Creek 915-560000-46900- AREA 5 No match FISS

Snass Creek 915-765500-35900- AREA 6 Y Y No info FISS; Bart Proctor South Bonilla Creek 915-560000-37500- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Sparkling Creek 400-016500-39800- AREA 6 No info FISS Spencer Creek 915-560000-69500- AREA 6 No info FISS Spiller River 915-765500-87800- AREA 3 Y Y Y Y FISS; Bart Proctor Stannard Creek 915-483500-62700-00500 AREA 3 No info FISS Stapledon Creek 400-021600- AREA 4 B. Proctor; No info FISS Triton Lake Inventory Stephen Nelson Lake 915-560200-12200- AREA 6 Y YYYY Reports Stewart Creek 915-563500-55400- AREA 6 No info FISS Sylvia Creek 915-560200-83800- AREA 6 Y YY FISS Update FISS; Triton Lake Sylvia Lake 915-560200-83800- AREA 6 Y YYYY Inventory Report Table Bay Creek 915-742200-30500- AREA 6 Y YY Bart Proctor Tag Creek Unknown AREA 6 Y FISS Update

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 5 of 6 Freshwater and Anadromous Fish and Fish Habitat in the North Coast Appendix II: Freshwater Fish Database CCG LAM SCU ADV CAS ACT CAL TSB STB MW KO RB DV EU CT RL ST Stream or Lake Merge PL Name Watershed Code Area Unique Recreation Vulnerable Explanation Reviewer Comments Reference Talahaat Creek 910-896600-12100- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Thulme River 910-854800- AREA 6 Y FISS Update FISS ; Triton Lake Toon Lake 910-855600- AREA 6 Y Invenotry Reports Trail Bay Creek 910-835200- AREA 6 Y Y FISS; FISS Update Treneman Creek 915-483500-57200- AREA 6 No info FISS Triumph Lake FISS Update; Triton Lake 910-584500- AREA 6 Y YYY Inventory Report Tsampanaknok Bay Creek 910-881000- AREA 6 No match FISS Tsimtack Lake System 915-560200-87900- AREA 5 No info FISS Turk Creek 915-876300-63200- AREA 5 No match FISS Turn Creek 915-541700-29400- AREA 5 No info FISS Turtle Creek 915-541700-45000- AREA 6 No info FISS -presence of Chum, Pinks, Coho, Tuwartz Creek 915-560200-95600- AREA 6 and trout No info FISS Triton Lake Inventory Tuwartz Lake 915-560200-93500- AREA 6 Y YY Reports FISS Update; Triton Lake Tyke Lake 910-779100- AREA 6 Y Y Inventory Report Union Lake FISS Update; Triton Lake 910-871900- AREA 6 Y YY Y Inventory Report Unnamed Creek 400-016500-64000- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 910-587200- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 910-713300-53800- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 910-744500- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 910-762600- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 910-929800-05800- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 915-560000-20700- AREA 6 Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 915-560200-64700- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 915-560200-84700- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 915-566500-13800- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 915-566500-72400- AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 915-789100-71400-4920 AREA 6 Y Y FISS Update Unnamed Creek 915-789100-82000- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update FISS Update; Triton Lake Unnamed Lake 910-724000- AREA 5 Y YYY Inventory Report Triton Lake Inventory Unnamed Lake 915-560200-34300- AREA 6 Y YYY Reports Weare Lake 910-740100- AREA 6 Y Y Y FISS Update

Welda Creek 500-016300- AREA 4 Y Y Y FISS Update; Bart Proctor

West Creek (Porcher) 915-765500-14100- AREA 5 Y Y Y Y FISS Whitley Point Creek 915-823500-67700- AREA 5 No match FISS Wilauks Creek 910-929900- AREA 5 Y Y Y FISS; Bart Proctor FISS lists only Pacific Wilson Creek 915-560200-42000- AREA 5 salmon Windy Island Creek 915-541700-04000- AREA 5 No match FISS Wolf Creek 910-789500- AREA 4 Y Y Y Bart Proctor Wolf Creek (Porcher) 915-765500-17500- AREA 5 Y Y Y Y Bart Proctor CT=Cutthroat Trout, ACT=Anadromous Cutthroat Trout, DV=Dolly Varden, ADV=Anadromous Dolly Varden, RB=Rainbow Trout, ST=Steelhead, KO=Kokanee, EU=Eulachon, MW=Mountain Whitefish, , CAS=Slimy Sculpin, CAL=Coastrange Sculpin, CCG=Prickly Sculpin, SCU=Sculpin, STB=Stickleback, LAM=Lamprey, RL=River Lamprey, PL=Pacific Lamprey, TSB=Threespine Stickleback

5

Gordon and Associates Ltd. Page 6 of 6

Appendix III. Abbreviated summary of BC Riparian Guidebook Approach to Riparian Management for streams S1 Large streams (> 20 m wide) with fish or in a community watershed

Reserve Zone (RRZ): 50 m (100 m RRZ on “Large Rivers”4 ); no harvesting except for “dangerous trees” as per WCB regulations

Management Zone (RMZ): 20 m; harvesting allowed. Best management practices recommended for this zone.

Retention in RMZ:

• The FPC specifies a 50% maximum retention (not to be exceeded at a forest development plan level. • Dead, “non-dangerous trees” should be left as per guidebook. • Wildlife trees should be considered for retention. • Manage windthrow hazard consistent with guidebook options. When on an active floodplain (further criteria provided for hardwood management along rivers):

• 70% to 100% retention of timber with harvesting using singletree, group selection or small patch cuts to maintain riparian structure. • Retain most non-merch. conifers, and understory vegetation. • Feather or top and limb the outer edge of the RMZ to reduce windthrow risk. When a Large River (100 m wide or more with wide (100m+) floodplain):

• RMZs set on back channels, side channels and sloughs as well. • 50% retention – dominant trees with large branches and open crowns (with reforestation plan to replace most for next harvest). S2 Medium sized streams (> 5 m and ≤ 20 m wide) with fish or in a community watershed

RRZ: 30 m RMZ: 20 m

Retention in RMZ:

• The FPC specifies a 50% maximum retention for S2’s (not to be exceeded at a forest development plan level). • Manage windthrow hazard consistent with guidebook options. • Dead, “non-dangerous trees” should be left as per guidebook. • Wildlife trees should be considered for retention. S3 Small streams (1.5 to 5 m wide) with fish or in a community watershed

RRZ: 20 m RMZ: 20 m

Retention in RMZ:

• The FPC specifies a 50% maximum retention for S3’s (not to be exceeded at a forest development plan level). • Manage windthrow hazard consistent with guidebook options. • Dead, “non-dangerous trees” should be left as per guidebook. • Wildlife trees should be considered for retention. S4 Very small streams (< 1.5 m) with fish or in a community watershed

RRZ: None RMZ 30 m:

Retention in RMZ:

• The FPC specifies a 25% maximum retention for S4’s (not to be exceeded at a forest development plan level). • Remove dominant conifers and retain 50% of the remaining stems within 10 m of the channel, while harvesting to maintain stand structure. • Retain all windfirm trees with roots embedded in the bank. • Fall and yard away and remove slash and debris providing the removal poses a greater threat to stream integrity and without damaging channel or bank. • Retain non-merch. conifers, and understory vegetation within 5 m of the channel as much as possible. • Wildlife trees should be considered for retention. • ALSO - WHERE WINDTHROW HAZARD IS HIGH and high tree retention within 10 m of channel cannot be achieved – consider the following:

• Harvest windthrow prone trees and maintain as many of the windfirm trees as possible. • In streams dependant on woody debris – Retain all conifers > 30 cm dbh. S5 Larger streams (> 3 m wide) without fish and outside of a comm. watershed

RRZ: None RMZ 30 m:

Retention in RMZ:

• The FPC specifies a 25% maximum retention for S5’s (not to be exceeded at a forest development plan level). • Retain nonmerch conifer trees and other vegetation within 10 m of channel as much as possible. • Wildlife trees should be considered for retention. • Fall and yard away and remove slash and debris. ALSO FOR COASTAL Valley bottom streams: Retain 50% of dominant and codominant windfirm stems.

ALSO FOR COASTAL Non-valley bottom streams dependant on woody debris or

streamside trees for channel / bank stability: Retain conifers < 30 cm dbh plus understory and deciduous trees within 5 m of channel and retain all leaners within 10 m of channel.

S6 Smaller streams (≤3 m wide) without fish and outside of a comm. watershed

RRZ: None RMZ 20 m:

Retention in RMZ:

• The FPC specifies a 5% maximum retention for S6’s (not to be exceeded at a forest development plan level). • Retain nonmerch conifer trees and other vegetation within 5 m of channel as much as possible. • Fall and yard away and remove slash and debris. • Wildlife trees should be considered for retention. Coast streams dependant on woody debris or streamside trees to maintain channel and bank stability and temperature sensitive streams:

• Retain 10 sph (< 30 cm dbh) per 100 m of streambank.

Appendix IV. Table of 26 streams that are Unthreatened in the North Coast LRMP area.

DFO Adult Mean Escapement Data Summary Mean Historical 1950- 1960- 1970- 1980- 1990- % Hist. Stream Name Species Max (50- Mean Stock Status 1959 1969 1979 1989 2001 Mean2 01) (50-89) Belle Bay Creek COHO 0 0 0 11 0 100 2 3 0% Questionable Belle Bay Creek PINK 0 0 358 3715 1992 10000 1090 876 227% Unthreatened Chismore Creek PINK 0 0 0 935 920 4100 371 234 394% Unthreatened Cliff Creek PINK 0 0 0 50 0 500 11 13 0% Questionable Fishtrap Bay Creek CHUM 0 0 0 5 9 50 2 1 905% Questionable Fishtrap Bay Creek COHO 0 0 0 6 0 25 1 1 0% Questionable Fishtrap Bay Creek PINK 0 0 0 1600 573 3200 435 400 143% Unthreatened Flewin Creek PINK 229 1207 131 885 1709 10000 884 608 281% Unthreatened Gil Creek CHUM 543 300 56 290 468 1800 369 338 138% Unthreatened Gil Creek COHO 213 390 55 163 1500 202 202 No Recent Records Gil Creek PINK 915 738 6463 24150 23927 60000 12159 8563 279% Unthreatened Gil Creek SOCKEYE 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 557% Questionable Hunts Creek COHO 0 0 0 2 0 20 0 1 0% Questionable Hunts Creek PINK 0 0 0 680 213 2765 174 170 125% Unthreatened Illiance River CHUM 7088 3840 3650 1775 2496 22000 3721 4088 61% Unthreatened Illiance River COHO 1422 150 165 550 400 3500 536 550 73% Unthreatened Illiance River PINK 250 0 778 1222 2488 6000 1007 539 461% Unthreatened Larch Creek CHUM 1 2 1 Questionable Larch Creek PINK 0 0 0 250 812 2500 200 63 1300% Unthreatened Lizard Creek CHUM 0 0 0 1 94 500 15 0 36771% Questionable Lizard Creek COHO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Questionable Lizard Creek PINK 0 0 856 1894 5550 14000 1672 651 852% Unthreatened Manzanita Cove Creek COHO 0 0 29 0 0 200 5 6 0% Questionable Manzanita Cove Creek PINK 0 0 3600 2178 1121 20000 1214 1244 90% Unthreatened Moore Cove Creek CHUM 250 500 250 Questionable Moore Cove Creek COHO 160 3067 690 9 7500 978 978 No Recent Records Moore Cove Creek PINK 46000 47750 26570 28250 50909 150000 40112 37143 137% Unthreatened Mouse Creek CHUM 21 40 21 Questionable

DFO Adult Mean Escapement Data Summary Mean Historical 1950- 1960- 1970- 1980- 1990- % Hist. Stream Name Species Max (50- Mean Stock Status 1959 1969 1979 1989 2001 Mean2 01) (50-89) Mouse Creek PINK 0 0 0 450 5564 17000 1288 113 4945% Unthreatened Oona River COHO 267 767 510 178 563 3500 445 432 130% Unthreatened Oona River PINK 10225 4295 11270 12496 12583 50000 10266 9571 131% Unthreatened Pearse Canal Creek PINK 0 0 600 0 0 6000 133 150 0% Questionable Perry Bay Creek CHUM 0 0 250 61 259 2500 107 79 330% Unthreatened Perry Bay Creek PINK 0 0 0 6 0 25 1 1 0% Questionable Prudhomme Creek COHO 0 0 0 19 670 2000 54 4 18363% Unthreatened Prudhomme Creek SOCKEYE 0 0 0 253 1182 2500 307 53 2218% Unthreatened Salmon Cove Creek COHO 0 0 0 21 0 100 4 4 0% Questionable Salmon Cove Creek PINK 0 0 944 3944 1188 9000 1163 1158 103% Unthreatened Shawatlan Creek CHINOOK 0 26 11 0 200 11 12 0% Questionable Shawatlan Creek CHUM 200 0 3 200 30 67 4% Questionable Shawatlan Creek COHO 13 1300 400 300 863 3500 495 438 197% Unthreatened Shawatlan Creek PINK 700 238 393 280 2000 429 487 58% Unthreatened Shawatlan Creek SOCKEYE 3270 2950 845 2586 1542 6000 2204 2408 64% Unthreatened Spiller River COHO 0 185 0 0 1500 64 64 No Recent Records Spiller River PINK 8350 3150 3165 2980 4785 40000 4486 4411 108% Unthreatened Stumaun Creek CHUM 0 5 0 0 0 50 1 1 0% Questionable Stumaun Creek COHO 0 75 0 3 0 750 20 21 0% Questionable Stumaun Creek PINK 833 1585 5056 7833 5642 15000 4226 3766 150% Unthreatened Tracy Creek CHUM 50 0 0 0 0 200 6 6 0% Questionable Tracy Creek COHO 75 0 0 0 0 75 4 5 0% Questionable Tracy Creek PINK 156 463 3855 1228 1632 10000 1311 1190 137% Unthreatened Trail Bay Creek PINK 0 0 0 11 0 100 2 3 0% Questionable Tsampanaknok Bay Creek COHO 0 0 0 2 0 20 0 1 0% Questionable Tsampanaknok Bay Creek PINK 0 0 89 52 1209 4500 338 29 4146% Unthreatened Welda Creek PINK 0 0 0 2235 615 10000 569 559 110% Unthreatened Whitley Point Creek PINK 0 0 222 1701 2978 10000 966 422 706% Unthreatened Wolf Creek COHO 0 0 3 4 0 34 1 2 0% Questionable Wolf Creek PINK 6050 9060 6041 6900 4233 30000 6371 7013 60% Unthreatened

Appendix V. Streams in the North Coast LRMP area that may have potentially unique or vulnerable fish stocks, or that have identified recreation potential.

Stream or Lake U R V Explanation Name Aaltanash River Y Guiding Antigonish Creek Y Steelhead (WBC, LK) Barnard Creek Y Wildlife viewing Big Bay Creek Y Steelhead (NCSI)

Canoona Creek Y Summer run steelhead. Wildlife viewing related to salmon runs.

Steelhead (NCSI, WBC, LK) - summer run. Marine blue clays, limited Chambers Creek Y Y offchannel habitat on floodplain, steelhead vulnerable to overfishing (WLAP)

Karst geologies, open systems vulnerable to ground disturbance, sensitive Chapple Creek Y hydrology Denise Creek Y Diana Creek Y Y Steelhead (NCSI, WBC, LK) Recreational fishing Karst geologies, open systems vulnerable to ground disturbance, sensitive Douglas Creek Y hydrology Eulachon; Spring run steelhead (WBC). Recreational fishing and viewing. Ecstall River Y Y Y Large river system. Class II water Ensheshese River Y Y Steelhead (WBC, LK). Guiding

Iknouk River Y Winter steelhead and recreational fishing. Inver Creek Y Steelhead (NCSI) Johnston Creek Y Y Steelhead (WBC); Recreational fishing Keesil Creek Y Steelhead (NCSI) Steelhead (WBC, LK); Shoreline-spawning kokanee ; Khtada Lake: Blue Khtada Creek Y Y ribbon fishery for Rainbow trout, 300,000+ shoreline spawning kokanoo, research site, surrounded by unstable terrains. Shoreline-spawning kokanee ; Khtada Lake: Blue ribbon fishery for Rainbow Khtada Lake Y Y trout, 300,000+ shoreline spawning kokanoo, research site, surrounded by unstable terrains.

Wildlife viewing related to salmon runs. Displacement potential and increased Khutze River Y mortality risk to Grizzly as a consequence of human use.

Steelhead (WBC, LK); Wildlife viewing related to salmon runs. Displacement Khutzeymateen Y Y potential and increased mortality risk to Grizzly as a consequence of human River use. Khyex River Y Y Eulachon run, steelhead (WBC, LK)

Winter run steelhead/suspected summer run steelhead. Displacement and Kincolith River Y Y increased mortality risk to Grizzly as a consequence of human use.

Kiskosh Creek Y Steelhead (NCSI, LK) Kitkiata Creek Y Steelhead (NCSI) Steelhead (NCSI) Recreational fishing and wildlife viewing. Displacement Kitsault River Y Y potential and increased mortality risk to Grizzly as a consequence of human use.

Stream or Lake U R V Explanation Name

Largest steelhead fishery in the NC (WLAP, WBC, LK); Recreational fishing; Kloiya River Y Y Y Steelhead vulnerable to over-fishing due to easy access (WLAP)

Karst geologies, potentially open systems with vulnerable to ground Kumealon Creek Y disturbance Spring run steelhead (WBC, LK); Recreational fishing, guiding; Class II Kwinamass River Y Y water; spring run steelhead. Displacement potential and increased mortality risk to Grizzly as a consequence of human use. Kwinitsa River Y Steelhead (WBC) Steelhead (WBC, LK); Important assessment stream for DFO and MELP; the Lachmach River Y only enumeration stream for steelhead in NC Lockerby Creek Y Steelhead (WBC) Lost Creek Y Steelhead (NCSI) Lowe Inlet System Y Viewing of salmon ascending falls at inlet

McNeil River Y Steelhead (NCSI) McNichol Creek Y Steelhead (NCSI) Moore Cove Creek Y Steelhead (NCSI)

Pa-Aat River Y Sea-run cutthroat (WLAP, LK); sea run cutthroat reported by M. Lambyorksi

Prudhomme Creek Y Recreational fishing

Steelhead (NCSI, LK); Exceptional eagle concentrations during salmon runs Quaal River Y (WLAP) Karst geologies, potentially open systems with vulnerable to ground Roland Creek Y disturbance Stagoo Creek Y Steelhead (NCSI) Toon River Y Steelhead (WBC)

Triumph Creek Y Y Summer-run steelhead (WLAP, WBC); Vulnerable to over-fishing (WLAP)

Union Creek Y Union Lake recreational fishing NCSI=North Coast Stream Inventory; WLAP=Water, Land and Air Protection; WBC=Watersheds BC (FISS); LK=Local Knowledge

Appendix VI: Documentation of Comments by GTT and DFO reviewers.

October 9, 2003

MSRM has requested that a summary of review comments be completed with that outlines whether, why and how the various review comments were dealt with in producing the final version. This appendix provides this summary.

Draft 1 of this report was submitted by Gordon and Associates Ltd. to Sarma Liepins (MSRM) on May 26, 2003 and was distributed to the DFO and WLAP by Sarma the same day. No review comments were received from WLAP. Review comments from MSRM and Hannah Horn were received June 3, 2003 and were integrated into the 2nd draft. On July 8, 2003, a 2nd draft of the background report was provided by Gordon and Associates Ltd. to Sarma Liepins (MSRM) and Hannah Horn. This was distributed to the GTT and DFO on July 25, 2003. Review comments from Hannah Horn and Sarma Liepins were received by Gordon and Associates Ltd. on July 24, 2003 and September 24, 2003 respectively. DFO comments on both the 1st and 2nd drafts were provided by email from Dale Guerit to Sarma Liepins. The key concerns were: • DFO did not support the analysis methodology in evaluating salmon escapement trends. • The results seriously exaggerate the state of the problem. • Report terminology (Threatened, and Of Some Concern) was not defined. • Designation of species at risk is the responsibility of COSEWIC. • The process of describe fish stocks should emulate that completed by Dave Bustard for the Morice WFSP.

In response to DFO’s concerns regarding the analysis of escapement data, emphasis has been added in the report that the results indicate “potentially” threatened stocks and that further data analysis and ground truthing is required to identify whether the data actually reflect what is occurring in the streams.

DFO contends that the terms “threatened” and “of some concern” are not defined. However, pages 7 and 8 of this report provide explicit definitions of these terms which are based on quantitative analysis of the data.

To avoid confusion between the terminology in this report and the terminology used by COSEWIC to identify “threatened” or “endangered” species, I have provided a summary of the COSEWIC process and definitions. It should be noted that the threshold for a “threatened” species as defined by COSEWIC is lower than defined in this report. As well, I have clarified that no connection exists between COSEWIC designations and the designations in this report.

DFO has suggested that the Morice WFSP process for describing fish stocks be used. I have reviewed the document by Dave Bustard (Bustard, 2002) and agree that it is an excellent review. However, the WFSP report only required the summary of escapement of 5 anadromous salmon stocks (including steelhead), compared to 543 in this report. Bustard also used DFO data to describe escapement trends, but did not categorize the trends of recent escapements as was done in this report.

Only one other review was received on the 2nd draft. This was from Chris Picard who requested that the escapement analysis completed in the report be compared to a published paper by Slaney et al (1996). This comparison was integrated into the final report.

All editorial and technical review comments by Hannah Horn and Sarma Liepins (MSRM) were integrated into the final report.

Dave Gordon, R.P.Bio.