Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region

NIWA Client Report: CHC2006-097 July 2006

NIWA Project: ENC06515

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region

M. J. Unwin

Prepared for

Environment Canterbury

NIWA Client Report: CHC2006-097 July 2006 NIWA Project: ENC06515

National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd 10 Kyle Street, Riccarton, Christchurch P O Box 8602, Christchurch, Phone +64-3-348 8987, Fax +64-3-348 5548 www.niwa.co.New Zealand

© All rights reserved. This publication may not be reproduced or copied in any form without the permission of the client. Such permission is to be given only in accordance with the terms of the client's contract with NIWA. This copyright extends to all forms of copying and any storage of material in any kind of information retrieval system.

Contents

Summary i

1. Introduction 1

2. Overview of the Canterbury salmon fishery 3

3. Sources of information 7 3.1. Spawning populations 7 3.1.1. The LEDB 7 3.1.2. FGNZ records 9 3.2. Angler surveys 10 3.2.1. The 1978/79 National Angling Survey 10 3.2.2. The 1994/96 and 2001/02 National Angling Surveys 10 3.2.3. Hatchery returns and straying 10

4. Criteria for ranking salmon spawning habitats 11 4.1. Habitat value 11 4.2. Fishery value 12 4.3. Other values 14 4.4. Overall value 15

5. Schedule of significant salmon spawning sites 17 5.1. Nationally significant sites 17 5.2. Regionally significant sites 19 5.2.1. 19 5.2.2. Hurunui River 19 5.2.3. 20 5.2.4. River 22 5.2.5. Ashburton River 22 5.2.6. River 24 5.2.7. Orari River 24 5.2.8. Opihi River 25 5.2.9. 25

6. Discussion 27

7. Acknowledgements 28

8. References 29

Appendix 1: Significant salmon spawning sites as listed in schedule WQN14

Appendix 2: Sites being used by spawning salmon

Appendix 3. Nationally and regionally important salmon spawning sites.

Reviewed by: Approved for release by:

Gavin James Don Jellyman

Summary

Environment Canterbury (ECan) has recently notified a variation to the Proposed Natural Resources Regional Plan (PNRRP) for managing the region’s water resources. As input to this process ECan had previously commissioned an inventory of salmonid habitats in the Canterbury region, which was published in 2000 as a technical report and GIS database. ECan subsequently used this database to compile a list of significant salmon spawning habitats (Schedule WQN 14). However, this list contained a number of anomalies, leading to a 2006 request from ECan to NIWA for a critical review of Schedule WQN 14 and the underlying GIS database. The main outputs required of this review were:

• development of criteria for ranking salmon spawning habitats in terms of their local, regional, and/or national importance for sustaining the salmon fishery; and

• application of these criteria to review the list of the salmon spawning habitats in Schedule WQN 14, and prepare a list of significant salmon spawning sites.

The ECan database identifies 183 sites as valuable for salmon spawning, in 16 catchments, from the Clarence River to the Waitaki River. Most (170) of these are used by sea run Chinook salmon, and the remainder by lake limited Chinook salmon or sockeye salmon. Fish & Game New Zealand records, and published reports on angler surveys (dating back to c. 1980) were used to gauge run strength and angling value for each individual site, supplemented (as appropriate) by data on recaptures of tagged salmon of hatchery origin during the 1980s and 1990s held in NIWA’s research databases.

Individual spawning sites were ranked as high, medium, or low value, taking into account the relative usage of each site within each catchment, and the temporal fidelity with which it is used over a period of years. Sites were ranked as High value if spawning fish were consistently present in all years, and generally accounted for at least 10% of total spawning. Sites were ranked as Medium value if spawning fish were present in most seasons, and sometimes accounted for over 10% of total spawning. Sites were ranked as Low value if spawning populations were ephemeral or highly variable, and could be absent for several consecutive years.

Angling value was assessed as either nationally, regionally, or locally significant, based on criteria which were developed from the 1978/79 National Angling Survey, and which have since been widely adopted by resource managers. Fisheries are considered Nationally significant if annual spawning runs can exceed ten thousand fish, and annual angling effort usually exceeds ten thousand angler-days and is distributed throughout the length of the river. Fisheries are considered Regionally significant if annual spawning runs generally number a few thousand fish, and angling effort is usually between two and ten thousand angler-days per year. Fisheries are considered Locally significant if annual spawning runs rarely exceed a few hundred fish, and salmon angling is largely an episodic activity which

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region i

confined to the river mouth. Other attributes which were taken into account as appropriate were enhancement value (i.e., streams associated with hatcheries); restoration potential (i.e., degraded streams which could contribute significantly to the fishery if appropriate restoration measures were implemented); diversity of angling opportunity; and scientific interest.

These habitat and fishery criteria are used to define a two way matrix in which individual sites can be classified and grouped with others of similar value. The basis for this classification scheme is that

1. sites in catchments which support nationally significant fisheries will generally be more important than those associated with regionally significant fisheries, which in turn are more important than locally significant fisheries; and

2. within each catchment, site value is directly related to habitat value. Thus, individual site value falls on a spectrum from high value habitats in nationally significant fisheries to low value habitats in locally significant fisheries.

This spectrum comprises five levels:

• Nationally significant: high value sites in nationally significant fisheries. Essential for maintaining the salmon fishing resource;

• Regionally significant: high value sites in regionally significant fisheries, and medium value sites in nationally significant fisheries. Important for maintaining the salmon fishing resource;

• Locally significant: high value sites in locally significant fisheries, medium value sites in regionally significant fisheries, and low value sites in nationally significant fisheries. Significant for maintaining the local angling resource, and may be regionally significant on a case by case basis;

• Little significance: medium value sites in locally significant fisheries, and low value sites in regionally significant fisheries. At best locally significant;

• No significance: low value sites in locally significant fisheries. Incidental to overall maintenance of fishery.

Based on these criteria, forty-eight sites were identified as of at least local significance, including 18 of national significance and 14 of regional significance. These are associated with Chinook salmon fisheries in nine catchments, and represent four nationally important fisheries (Waimakariri River, , , Waitaki River); three regionally important fisheries (Hurunui River, Opihi River, and ); and four locally important fisheries (Waiau River, Ashburton River, Orari River, ). Also included are four spawning sites important for sockeye salmon in the

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region ii

upper Waitaki catchment. Details of all sites are tabulated in a series of Appendices, and are also shown in map form based on an updated GIS layer provided by ECan.

The revised Schedule of salmon spawning sites developed in this review has attempted to resolve all of the major inconsistencies in the existing Schedule WQN 14. Seven of the sixteen catchments listed in Schedule WQN 14 have been dropped, and all upstream and downstream map references have been reviewed. Other changes reflect the addition of sites in the Waimakariri catchment (which were excluded from the original Schedule), inclusion of sites used by landlocked sockeye salmon, and changes to the GIS layers for several upper Rakaia River sites to correct long-standing errors in their representation in Topomap Series NZMS260. However, all rankings remain partly subjective, and the spatial extent of each site should be verified by ground truthing before taking any management action.

This review has focussed on the recent (10-20 year) historical record, consistent with ECan’s requirements and the timeframe adopted when compiling Schedule WQN 14. In doing so, it risks overlooking historically important fisheries which are now degraded to the point where they are no longer viable. Such fisheries include the Ashburton, Opihi, and Hataramea, as well as smaller rivers such as the Maerewhenua and Waihao. While some such waters may now have very limited potential, others may still be amenable to more interventionist or protective management strategies to restore some or all of their former value. For these reasons, the present report should be interpreted as an assessment of the current status quo, rather than defining the scope of the Canterbury salmon fishery for all time. Should ECan wish to pursue future enhancement or restoration options, further consultation with end users (particularly FGNZ) would be appropriate to better identify candidate rivers and spawning waters.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region iii

1. Introduction

Environment Canterbury (ECan) has recently notified a variation to the Proposed Natural Resources Regional Plan (PNRRP) which establishes objectives, policies and methods for managing the region’s water resources. As input to this process ECan commissioned a desktop study to compile an inventory of salmonid habitats, based on published and unpublished sources. This was undertaken in co-operation with Fish and Game New Zealand (FGNZ), and the results are contained in an unpublished ECan technical report and GIS database (Langlands & Elley 2000). However, this inventory did not include a regional assessment of the values of these habitats because FGNZ staff were unwilling to make a comparative assessment of individual habitats, and to rank them in terms of their regional importance.

Chinook1 salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) were introduced to the River from 1901-1906 by the predecessors of today’s Fish & Game Councils, and by c. 1915 had established self-sustaining populations in all major east coast rivers as far north as the Waimakariri (McDowall 1994). Their present day distribution extends from the in to the in Marlborough, with smaller populations in some West Coast rivers, and isolated specimens occasionally recorded in the North Island. However, the core populations, and the sports fisheries they sustain, are confined to the east coast of the from the Waitaki River on the border between and to the Waiau River in North Canterbury. This area coincides more or less exactly with the greater Canterbury region under the jurisdiction of ECan. Sockeye salmon (O. nerka) occur in the Waitaki system, but are limited to freshwater resident stocks maintained by spawning populations in and above Lake Ohau. These stocks have at times been considered on the verge of extinction (Unwin 2000), but have proved to be surprisingly resilient with significant (albeit localised) spawning runs observed in 2006.

The most stable and temporally persistent Chinook salmon populations within the Canterbury region are generally associated with established spawning sites in specific reaches or tributaries, which are critical to sustaining the salmon fishery. Recognising this, ECan has used the Langlands & Elley (2000) report to compile a Schedule of significant salmon spawning habitats (Schedule WQN 14; see Appendix 1), linked to various regional rules in the plan. However, the stream segments defined by Langlands & Elley (2000) were not necessarily selected solely for their value as salmon spawning habitat, so that in many cases the waters actually used by spawning

1 Chinook salmon are informally known by various names, including king salmon and (in New Zealand) quinnat salmon. In 2003 the name was formally changed from chinook to Chinook, in recognition of its origin as the name of the Chinook Indian Tribe of southwest Washington (Nelson et al., 2003).

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 1

salmon comprise only a sub-section of the entire segment. In addition, the Schedule currently includes some water bodies which spawning salmon are likely to use only in an opportunistic manner when favourable conditions arise, and are not necessarily significant in a regional or national context. ECan has therefore requested NIWA to “Critically review the list of salmon spawning sites in Schedule WQN 14, and prepare a list of significant spawning sites that are essential to maintain the salmon fishery in the Canterbury region”. For the purposes of the Schedule, a significant salmon spawning site is one of national or regional importance to the salmon fishery. Only significant spawning sites will be included in the final draft of Schedule WQN14.

Specific tasks identified as part of this review are:

(a) review unpublished and published information, especially the Langlands & Elley (2000) report and GIS database;

(b) develop criteria for ranking salmon spawning habitats, in terms of their local, regional, and/or national importance for sustaining the salmon fishery;

(c) based on the criteria in (b), review the list of the salmon spawning habitats in Schedule WQN 14 and, if necessary, from other information sources, and prepare a list of significant salmon spawning sites.

This review is the subject of the present report. It begins with an overview of the salmon fishery, emphasising developments over the last 20-25 years and highlighting current trends. It briefly reviews information bases relevant to this study, focussing on four which are considered to be the most relevant: (1) the Langlands and Elley (2000) database (hereafter LEDB), (2) current FGNZ reports documenting recent spawning surveys, (3) databases on angler usage of New Zealand lakes and rivers collected by FGNZ and/or NIWA, or the predecessors of these two agencies (Teirney et al. 1982c, Unwin & Brown 1998, Unwin & Image 2003); and (4) data on salmon of hatchery origin, predominantly from the Rakaia River, which were recaptured by anglers on their return to fresh water after 2-3 years at sea (Unwin et al. 1988, Unwin & Quinn 1993). It proposes criteria for ranking spawning habitats according to their local, regional, or national importance for sustaining the salmon fishery, based primarily on their habitat and angling values, but also with regard to their value for hatchery supplementation, potential for enhancement, and scientific value. Finally, these criteria are used to compile a list of significant sites. The main focus is Chinook salmon, but sockeye salmon are also considered.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 2

Salmon spawning sites in the Waimakariri catchment were not included in Schedule WQN 14, as this catchment is covered separately in the Waimakariri River Regional Plan. After discussion with ECan staff, it was decided to include salmon spawning sites in the Waimakariri River catchment for completeness.

2. Overview of the Canterbury salmon fishery

Salmon angling in Canterbury has long been associated with the large, braided rivers which formed, and now traverse, the . As a general rule, run strength and angling activity are directly correlated with river size. The largest populations, and the most heavily used fisheries, occur in the four rivers draining the glaciated portion of the Southern Alps between Arthurs Pass in the north and the Hopkins Valley in the south: the Waimakariri, Rakaia, Rangitata, and Waitaki. Intermediate populations, and the fisheries which they support, occur in the more northern main divide rivers such as the Hurunui and Waiau, and smaller rivers such as the Ashburton and Opihi, whose headwaters are mainly rain or snow fed but lie to the east of the Main Divide. The smallest runs are found in rivers rising in the foothills or further to the east, such as the Ashley and Orari.

Angler usage estimates for the various Canterbury rivers highlight the importance of the salmon fishery not only to local anglers, but to the country as a whole. In terms of total effort, angling in the South Island is dominated by a relatively small number of rivers in Canterbury, Otago, and Southland (Fig. 1), with the four main salmon rivers accounting for 164 000 (12.3%) of the 1.33 million days expended by anglers annually in 1995 (Unwin & Brown 1998), and 111 000 (10%) of 1.11 million days (excluding the Taupo conservancy) in 2002 (Unwin & Image 2003), most of which is devoted to salmon angling. The Waimakariri River consistently ranks with the River as one of the two most heavily fished rivers in New Zealand, and the Rakaia and Waitaki have consistently ranked in the top ten (Deans et al. 2004). The importance of angling to Canterbury anglers is further highlighted by figures for fishing licence sales per head of population, with participation rate in the Central South Island region (14.3% of adult males) exceeded only in Southland (15.8%; Unwin & Image 2003).

The geographical distribution of salmon has traditionally been attributed to the availability of spawning habitat, particularly small, spring-fed headwater tributaries along the floodplain margins of the larger rivers. In contrast to the mainstems of these rivers, which are prone to frequent and sudden inundation when snow and ice melt in the headwaters is augmented by heavy orographic rainfall, these marginal streams are

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 3

Type of water Rivers

Mainstem Lowland Back country Headwater Artificial (e.g. canal)

Lakes Clarence Natural (> 5 km2) Waiau Natural (< 5 km2) Hurunui Hydro/irrigation Lake Coleridge Lake Ashley Heron Waimakariri

Rakaia Ashburton Rangitata Orari Opihi

Waitaki Estimated annual usage (days)

50 000 20 000 10 000 5 000 2 000 Mataura 1 000 500 200 100

Figure 1: Estimated annual angling usage of South Island lakes and rivers, 1994/95 (source: Unwin & Brown 1998).

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 4

typically clear and stable with an abundance of clean gravel substrates, and are heavily used by spawning Chinook salmon. However, this characteristic does not, on its own,are broadly similar to those of Chinook2. A more complete explanation may be that larger rivers provide a relatively gradual transition for juveniles moving from fresh to salt water, particularly during floods when extensive low salinity plumes are likely to extend for some kilometres off the coast (Unwin 1997b). This transition is a critical phase in the Chinook salmon life cycle, involving rapid changes in osmoregulation, and the absence of extensive estuaries in most Canterbury rivers is in sharp contrast to their ancestral Sacramento River. The prevalence of salmon in the four biggest rivers may therefore reflect both their predilection for higher discharges, and the availability of suitable spawning waters within these rivers.

Chinook salmon survival rates vary more than one hundred fold from year to year (Unwin 1997a), resulting in considerable inter-annual variation in run strength. However, runs throughout the Canterbury region have declined markedly over the last 10-15 years. Reliable estimates of total run strength for individual rivers before c. 1990 are few, although angler surveys and spawning counts for the Rakaia River suggest total runs of 9 400 fish in 1973/74 (comprising 3 500 fish caught by anglers, and a spawning escapement of 5 900 fish), and 19 100 in 1974/75 (anglers: 4 900 fish; spawning: 14 200 fish; West & Goode 1986, 1987). The 1975/76 run is likely to have been higher still, with an estimated spawning escapement of 16 700 fish (West & Goode 1987). Spawning populations in the Waitaki system have been estimated to range from 4 200 to 15 900 (1975-1986), based on redd counts for the Waitaki main stem and its main spawning tributary, the (James & Deverall 1987). Catch estimates for other rivers and seasons are highly variable (Table 1), ranging from 800 for the Hurunui River in 1981/82 (Bonnett et al. 1991) to 12 300 for the Rakaia River in 1978/79 (Unwin & Davis 1983), but are consistent with total run strengths from a few thousand in low years to well over 20 000 in a good year on the more productive rivers (e.g., Rakaia, Waitaki). By contrast, more recent runs have rarely exceeded a few thousands, with a particularly pronounced decline since the mid 1990s (Deans et al. 2004, Table 2). The reasons for this decline are unknown, and it remains to be established whether the fishery is in the middle of some cyclical low which will eventually be reversed, or is responding to some longer term influence such as climate change or a slow degradation in habitat quality.

Attempts to develop commercial ocean ranching of Chinook salmon from c. 1977 to 1990 boosted the number of adults returning to many rivers during the 1980s, with at least 42 000 adult salmon of hatchery origin caught by anglers during this period (Deans et al. 2004). Most of these fish originated from the upper Rakaia River and

2 Chinook prefer slightly deeper gravels and larger substrate size than trout, but require similar water depths and velocities.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 5

returned to their river of origin, but release programmes in other rivers and an 11% straying rate for hatchery fish ensured that returning fish contributed significantly to spawning runs throughout Canterbury, particularly between the Waiau River and the Rangitata River, with occasional strays recorded as far away as Otago Harbour and Taranaki (Unwin & Quinn 1993). Although none of these ventures continued into the 1990s, angler concern over the current low run levels has led to hatchery supplementation programmes being re-established on the Rakaia River (in 2001), and the Rangitata River (to begin releasing fish in 2007). Both programmes are constrained by the availability of funding and are likely to remain relatively small scale for the short term at least, pending a collective decision from the salmon angling community as to how much it is willing to pay to sustain the fishery. They have the potential to become important components of the fishery if their future can be secured.

Table 1: Estimated catches of Chinook salmon (thousands of fish) by anglers on five Canterbury rivers, 1978/79 – 1986/87.

Season Hurunui Waimakariri Rakaia Rangitata Waitaki 1978/79 12.3 1 1979/80 2.1 5 8.0 1 1980/81 1.4 5 7.3 1 1.5 4 1981/82 0.8 5 2.1 4 1982/83 4.5 2 1983/84 4.6 3 6.9 2 1984/85 6.7 7 1985/86 9.3 7 1986/87 3.8 6 7.6 6 3.9 6 2.3 7

Sources: 1 Unwin & Davis (1983); 2 Davis et al. (1987); 3 Jellyman et al. (1987); 4 Pierce & Smith (1989); 5 Bonnett et al. (1991); 6 Unwin (1991); 7 James (1992).

Research during the 1990s has highlighted the importance of evolutionary change in allowing sea-run (anadromous) stocks of Chinook salmon to become established in New Zealand, outside their native North America (Quinn et al. 2001). A key finding was that local adaptation over the ~30 generations since Chinook were introduced to New Zealand has been sufficient to allow the development of measurable differences between populations in different rivers, in phenotypic traits such as length at age and migratory timing (Kinnison et al. 1998a, Quinn et al. 2000), and also in a stricter genetic sense (Kinnison et al. 2002). Particularly striking divergences were observed between stocks in the Rakaia and Waitaki Rivers (Kinnison et al. 1998b, Kinnison et al. 1998c, Unwin et al. 2003), and the Rakaia River and the , a tributary of the Waimakariri River (Unwin et al. 2000). These patterns are likely to be ongoing, and to contribute to further inter-population divergence over decadal timescales. From a management perspective, it is important that habitat diversity is maintained so that local divergence can continue to evolve.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 6

Table 2: Annual runs of Chinook salmon in the four main salmon rivers, 1993-2005. For the first three rivers the table shows the total run and angler catch (in thousands of fish), and the angler catch as a percentage of the total. For the lower Waitaki River, data shown are the estimated spawning run (number of fish) in the Hakataramea River tributary, and the catch (thousands of fish) by Central South Island anglers. (Sources: Deans et al. 2004).

Waimakariri River Rakaia River Rangitata River lower Waitaki River Total Angler Total Angler Total Angler Hakataramea Angler Year run catch run catch run catch spawning run catch 1993 2.4 1.1 3.9 1.1 1 173 1994 4.1 1.6 19.9 7.9 11.4 3.3 6 301 3.4 1995 10.4 4.4 11.6 3.1 8.5 3.2 1 183 7.1 1996 13.5 6.0 22.6 9.0 16.6 5.4 5 962 2.2 1997 9.1 3.9 18.5 8.5 15.8 5.8 934 3.1 1998 5.8 2.8 6.1 2.6 6.4 2.6 367 2.3 1999 7.1 4.7 6.5 2.6 7.8 3.5 829 1.9 2000 3.5 2.6 4.9 3.0 4.4 2.1 282 1.1 2001 1.9 1.1 1.6 0.8 1.0 0.3 12 0.5 2002 3.3 1.1 2.5 0.6 1.0 0.2 79 0.6 2003 3.6 1.8 3.1 1.7 1.6 0.7 12 0.8

3. Sources of information

3.1. Spawning populations

3.1.1. The LEDB

The LEDB attempts to record all habitats of value to salmonids within the Canterbury Region. The authors used a variety of sources to compile this inventory, including Acclimatisation and FGNZ annual reports, Ministry of Fisheries and NIWA technical reports, and discussions with key FGNZ staff. This process appears to have been systematic and exhaustive, with over 100 references cited in the bibliography, and a total of 523 sites identified in the habitat database. Individual sites were then digitised, and incorporated into a GIS layer held by ECan.

The LEDB covers all salmonid species, including brown trout (Salmo trutta), rainbow trout (O. mykiss), and less widely distributed species such as sockeye salmon, brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), and lake trout or mackinaw (Salvelinus namaycush). Habitat values are categorised by species, and – within each species – by habitat type, so as to differentiate between spawning habitats, juvenile rearing habitats, river habitats, and lake habitats etc. The database also allows for multiple values to be associated with each habitat, so that a particular site may be recognised for (e.g.) Chinook salmon spawning, brown trout juvenile rearing, and resident stocks of adult brown trout. Sites are classified as high, medium, or low value, using a set of criteria based on various qualitative descriptors of habitat suitability (Table 3).

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 7

Table 3: Positive attributes of a freshwater environment which provide a measure of habitat quality for introduced salmonids, as defined in the LEDB for assessing individual waters. Habitats were valued as either high (these attributes represented), medium (some of these attributes represented), or low (few of these attributes represented).

• Presence of spawning fish and spawning shingles, with a large percentage of the fish within the catchment spawning at the site. • Presence of nursery areas for juvenile fish. Areas such as side channels and backwaters characterised by a stable environment. • Presence of riparian vegetation along a significant part of the riverbank/lake shore providing shade/cover for fish. • Concentrations of adult fish (as determined from methods such as drift dive surveys). • Resident salmonid population. • Stability of river flow or lake level allowing the development of macrophyte/moss growths on substrate. • River or lake natural physical characteristics maintained. • Natural pool and riffle alternation pattern maintained. • Presence of a headwater population of fish representing large trout which form the breeding stock for the catchment. • Areas identified where fish can survive in critical periods of low flows (for example deep pools in a low flow river). • Geological features which provide important structural habitat for large trout holding territories in pools- for example limestone pools, rock bluffs and deep gorges. • Presence of thermal refuge for salmonids (e.g. cold water confluence on a river system from a spring creek into a braided river or springs within the lake bed). • Presence of a proportionally large littoral zone (lakes). • Diversity of shoreline types (rocky, shingle, sand-flats). • Lack of restrictions to fish passage- man-made/natural structures. • Natural characteristics of water quality maintained (i.e. no excessive siltation/ eutrophication/inorganic pollution inputs).

A total of 184 sites were identified as valuable for salmon spawning, comprising 170 sites used by sea run Chinook stocks, nine used by lake limited Chinook, and five by sockeye salmon. One of the lake limited Chinook sites (the outlet of Lake Alexandrina, listed as Site 532) appears to be an error, as Chinook salmon are not present in the upper Waitaki catchment above the Waitaki Dam at Kurow3. Excluding this site, 183 habitats were identified in 16 catchments, from the Clarence River in the north to the Waitaki River in the south (Table 4, Appendix 2).

3 Escapees from salmon farms in the Tekapo and Ohau Canals provide a significant angling resource, and occasionally penetrate into the source lakes, but do not constitute spawning populations in the sense of this review as virtually all such fish are from monosex female stocks.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 8

Spawning sites listed in the LEDB were identified and ranked solely on their habitat value, without reference to the angling value of the corresponding river or catchment. This emphasis was deliberate, and was intended to maximise consistency between individual waters and different salmonid species. However, this also introduced some significant anomalies, in that sites in catchments with only limited angling value were sometimes ranked above sites in catchments which support major fisheries, but are of secondary importance within the catchment as a whole. Resolving such anomalies is one of the aims of this review.

Table 4: Counts of salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region identified in the LEDB, by catchment (ordered from north to south), and habitat value (as assessed in the LEDB).

Catchment High Medium Low Total Clarence 1 1 1 3 Lyell Creek 1 1 Waiau 3 2 9 14 Hurunui § 2 6 12 20 Ashley 2 2 6 10 Waimakariri 9 3 31 43 Avon/Heathcote 2 2 4 Selwyn 1 1 Rakaia 6 † 7 10 23 Ashburton 3 1 8 12 Hinds 1 1 Rangitata 2 5 12 19 Orari 2 1 3 Opihi 3 6 7 16 Pareora 2 2 Waitaki 2 2 7 11

Total 38 35 110 183

§ includes one site (Homestead Stream) assessed as “low to high” † includes one site (Lake Stream) assessed as low (for sea-run Chinook) and medium (for lake limited Chinook)

3.1.2. FGNZ records

FGNZ have consistently monitored Chinook salmon spawning populations and angler catches in selected spawning waters and fisheries since 1993. Much of this data is unpublished, but is generally available from local FGNZ staff and was an important information source for the LEDB.

The present report draws on two recent unpublished summaries of these data, for the North Canterbury (Terry 2005) and Central South Island (Webb 2004) Regions,

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 9

respectively. These reports include angler harvest and spawning count data for the 2005 season, but also provide useful summaries of trends in the fishery over the last 5- 10 years. Where relevant, information from these reports was used in this review to help assess the status of individual river fisheries and spawning streams.

3.2. Angler surveys

3.2.1. The 1978/79 National Angling Survey

The 1978/79 National Angling Survey used a nation-wide postal sample survey to collect data on angler usage of New Zealand river fisheries, and to identify attributes which characterised the most highly valued fisheries (Teirney & Richardson 1992, Teirney et al. 1982c). Results for river fisheries in the Canterbury region were summarised in four reports, one for each of the four Acclimatisation Districts (North Canterbury, Ashburton, South Canterbury, and Waitaki Valley) which were responsible for managing freshwater fisheries at that time (Teirney et al. 1982a, 1982b, 1987a, 1987b).

An important outcome of this survey was that it contributed significantly to the development of consistent guidelines for identifying and classifying river fisheries of national, regional, and local importance (National Water and Soil Conservation Organisation 1982, Teirney et al. 1982c). These guidelines have continued to be used with relatively little change over the ensuing 25 years, and have been adopted for the present report.

3.2.2. The 1994/96 and 2001/02 National Angling Surveys

The 1994/96 and 2001/02 National Angling Surveys, conducted jointly by Fish & Game New Zealand (FGNZ) and NIWA, provide estimates of total annual angling effort for all lake and river fisheries managed by FGNZ (Unwin & Brown 1998, Unwin & Image 2003). Neither survey covered fisheries in the Taupo Conservancy (which are administered by the Department of Conservation), although concurrent figures for the Conservancy were available for comparison in 1994/96. For the present review, usage estimates for the 16 catchments identified in the LEDB were used to help assess the significance of their respective salmon fisheries.

3.2.3. Hatchery returns and straying

Between 1977 and 1997, 46 million hatchery salmon were released from 55 locations in 21 South Island catchments. About 10% of these fish were marked with coded-wire

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 10

micro-tags, enabling returning adults to be identified by origin and point of release, and providing direct measures of survival rates and age at return (Unwin 1997a).

Recaptures of tagged adult Chinook from rivers outside their catchment of release provide a measure of straying rates, and help to illuminate dispersal patterns between the various salmon producing rivers (Unwin & Quinn 1993). Straying along the Canterbury coast is strongly skewed to the north, presumably reflecting the influence of the Southland Current which parallels the coast as far north as Banks Peninsula, with straying rates into individual rivers directly proportional to mean flow, and decreasing with increasing geographical separation.

Data from angler recaptures of tagged fish are invariably conservative, because not all such fish are recognised and returned, and must therefore be interpreted with some caution. However, the presence of large numbers of strays in a particular river or catchment is evidence of significant angler activity, and also suggests that the river itself is “acceptable” to salmon seeking suitable spawning waters. Conversely, little or no evidence of straying suggests that a river is relatively lightly used by salmon anglers, and may be less attractive to returning adult salmon. Where appropriate, information on straying has been taken into account in this review.

4. Criteria for ranking salmon spawning habitats

4.1. Habitat value

Of the sixteen salmonid habitat criteria developed for the LEDB (Table 3), only the first:

“Presence of spawning fish and spawning shingles, with a large percentage of the fish within the catchment spawning at the site”

is directly relevant to salmon spawning. Other criteria, including the presence of nursery areas for juvenile fish, stability of river flow, and natural pool/riffle alternation patterns, are either implicit in the statement above, relevant to other life stages (e.g., juvenile rearing, adult passage) and are ranked as such elsewhere in the database, or relevant only to trout. Given that habitats were purportedly ranked according to the number of criteria which were represented (e.g., most, some, few), it is unclear how the rankings for salmon spawning habitats were derived. However, the requirement that “…a large percentage of the fish within the catchment [spawn] at the site…” suggests that they are likely to have been based on a judgement as to the relative usage of each site within the catchment as a whole.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 11

To develop this idea further, and hence to provide a more structured basis for ranking each site, a three level hierarchy is proposed which takes into account both the relative usage of each site, and the temporal fidelity with which it is used over a period of years. The three levels are as follows:

• High value: spawning fish consistently present in all years. Annual counts may fluctuate markedly between years, and may occasionally be low, but (in catchments where total run strength can be quantified) will generally account for at least 10% of total spawning.

• Medium value: spawning fish present in most but not necessarily all years. Annual counts will fluctuate markedly and will sometimes be low, but (in catchments where total run strength can be quantified) may sometimes account for over 10% of total spawning.

• Low value: spawning populations are ephemeral, highly variable, and may be absent for several consecutive years. Annual counts may represent a substantial proportion of spawners within the catchment, but total run strength (if known) will rarely exceed 100 fish and may be much lower.

The numerical limits included in the above hierarchy are deliberately broad, and are intended to be interpreted qualitatively rather than prescriptively. Spawning counts within any one catchment will only rarely be precise enough to allow the relative contribution of each stream to be estimated to better than ±10%, and will often be completely lacking.

4.2. Fishery value

Traditional measures of fishery (i.e., angling) value generally combine quantitative information on effort or catch with indices of angling quality (e.g., Teirney & Richardson 1992, Teirney et al. 1982c). Such measures allow fisheries which receive comparatively low levels of usage but may be of exceptional quality, such as headwater trout fisheries which provide high quality angling in a remote wilderness environment (Jellyman & Graynoth 1994), to be valued alongside highly accessible and heavily used fisheries close to centres of population. For river fisheries, this spectrum of attributes has been formalised by classifying individual fisheries into one of three categories, defined as wilderness (remote, low use rivers in pristine environments), scenic (backcountry fisheries accessible by road, with high scenic values and intermediate levels of use), or recreational (high use, close to population centres, catchment may be significantly modified Teirney et al. 1982c).

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 12

Most salmon fisheries are associated with the lower reaches of their respective catchments, and can be classified as recreational fisheries, ranging in importance from national to local (Table 5). Annual usage (for both trout and salmon angling) varies from over 30 000 angler-days4 for the four main rivers to between 1 000 and 10 000 for less heavily used fisheries. The proportion of this effort devoted to salmon angling also varies widely, typically exceeding 80-90% on the Waimakariri, Rakaia, and Rangitata, but considerably lower (30% or less) on rivers such as the Hurunui (Teirney et al. 1987b, Unwin & Davis 1983).

Table 5: Salmon producing rivers listed in the LEDB, showing their importance as assessed in the 1980/81 angling survey (Teirney et al. 1982c), the 1994/95 National Angling Survey (Unwin & Brown 1998), and the 2001/2002 National Angling Survey (Unwin & Image 2003). The final column indicates the value of each salmon fishery as assessed in this review, noting that usage estimates for each river include both trout and salmon angling.

Annual usage (angler-days ± 1SE) Current status Importance 1982 (salmon River (all angling) 1994/95 2001/02 angling) Clarence River 840 ± 370 620 ± 170 occasional Lyell Creek 0 40 ± 40 Waiau River regional 1 400 ± 490 2 100 ± 420 local Hurunui River national 17 100 ± 3 300 8 400 ± 1 000 regional Ashley River local 4 500 ± 1 100 3 500 ± 680 occasional Waimakariri River national 58 400 ± 7 100 48 900 ± 4 300 national River 5 200 ± 2 200 1 800 ± 460 local Silverstream 1 400 ± 620 320 ± 150 local Avon River 1 000 ± 450 730 ± 250 Heathcote River 0 260 ± 160 Selwyn River regional 6 700 ± 1 400 2 100 ± 540 Tentburn Outfall 2 300 ± 1 200 30 ± 30 local Rakaia River national 34 600 ± 3 800 21 500 ± 2 000 national Lake Coleridge (not surveyed) 7 100 ± 1 300 9 200 ± 850 regional Lake Heron (not surveyed) 2 600 ± 730 2 600 ± 940 local Ashburton River regional 4 200 ± 780 5 500 ± 1 100 local 210 ± 100 320 ± 170 Rangitata River national 36 000 ± 2 600 12 700 ± 1 900 national Orari River local 6 300 ± 770 2 300 ± 560 local Opihi River regional 18 500 ± 1 700 13 400 ± 1 700 regional Pareora River local 190 ± 110 850 ± 290 Waitaki River national 34 500 ± 3 100 27 600 ± 2 600 national

4 An angler-day is one angler fishing on one day, irrespective of the time spent fishing.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 13

Taking these measures into account, together with the available data on run strength (Table 2; see also Terry 2005, Webb 2004), a three-level scale is also considered appropriate for assessing the importance of individual salmon fisheries. These levels are as follows:

• Nationally significant: annual spawning runs generally number in the thousands, and exceed ten thousand in some years. Salmon angling effort usually exceeds ten thousand angler-days per year and may be considerably higher, and is distributed throughout the length of the river. May attract significant usage from anglers travelling from well outside their home FGNZ region.

• Regionally significant: annual spawning runs generally number a few thousands, but rarely if ever exceed ten thousand. Total angling effort usually between two and ten thousand angler-days per year, with salmon angling predominantly confined to the river mouth and lower reaches. Mostly fished by anglers travelling within their home FGNZ region.

• Locally significant: annual spawning runs rarely exceed a few hundreds, and may be almost absent in some years. Strays from other salmon-producing rivers may contribute significantly in some years. Total angling effort may be as high as ten thousand angler-days per year but is dominated by trout angling, with salmon angling largely an episodic activity in response to runs which are intermittent at best. Salmon angling is restricted to the river mouth, and is almost entirely limited to local anglers living within a few km of the river.

For the purposes of this report, it is convenient to add a fourth level to accommodate rivers in which salmon are occasionally recorded, but which cannot legitimately be considered to sustain a salmon fishery. This helps to distinguish between local fisheries (as defined above), where anglers can reasonably expect to sight a few salmon under suitable conditions in most years, and those where the presence of salmon is more of an aberration, almost certainly due to straying. One of the features of the LEDB is that it does not attempt to make this distinction, and has thus led to the inclusion in Schedule WQN 14 of several spawning sites which are of virtually no significance to the fishery. The term “occasional” is used to identify such fisheries.

4.3. Other values

Individual spawning waters may also have attributes which contribute to or enhance their inherent value to the fishery, but do not fit directly into the rating scales for either

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 14

habitat or angling value as proposed above. Consideration of these attributes can help to make a more informed judgement as to the value of sites for which the status would otherwise be unclear. These values include:

• Enhancement: streams associated with salmon hatcheries which contribute to the recreational fishery by collecting and spawning gametes from returning adults, and raising their progeny for subsequent release as fingerlings;

• Restoration: streams on rivers which currently sustain fisheries of low value, generally because of habitat degradation, but which could potentially contribute significantly to the fishery if appropriate restoration measures were implemented (see Section 6.2);

• Angling diversity: streams associated with lake (as distinct from river) fisheries, or species other than Chinook (i.e., sockeye), and hence contribute significantly to the diversity of the angling experience available;

• Scientific: streams associated with spawning populations of high scientific interest;

4.4. Overall value

The habitat and fishery criteria developed above can be laid out in a simple matrix format to provide a plausible and conceptually simple framework for gauging the overall value of each spawning site. Essentially, this assumes that:

3. sites in catchments which support nationally significant fisheries will generally be more important than those associated with regionally significant fisheries, which in turn are more important than locally significant fisheries;

4. within each catchment, site value is directly related to habitat value. Thus, individual site value can be readily located on a spectrum from high value habitats in nationally significant fisheries to low value habitats in locally significant fisheries (Table 6).

This spectrum comprises five levels, defined in terms of the significance of each for maintaining the salmon fishing resource:

• Nationally significant: high value sites in nationally significant fisheries. Essential for maintaining the salmon fishing resource;

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 15

• Regionally significant: high value sites in regionally significant fisheries, and medium value sites in nationally significant fisheries. Important for maintaining the salmon fishing resource;

• Locally significant: high value sites in locally significant fisheries, medium value sites in regionally significant fisheries, and low value sites in nationally significant fisheries. Significant for maintaining the local angling resource, and may be regionally significant on a case by case basis;

• Little significance: medium value sites in locally significant fisheries, and low value sites in regionally significant fisheries. At best locally significant;

• No significance: low value sites in locally significant fisheries. Incidental to overall maintenance of fishery.

Table 6: Two-way ranking scheme used to identify spawning sites of national, regional, and local significance.

Habitat value Fishery value High Medium Low

National High value habitat in a Medium value habitat in a Low value habitat in a nationally significant nationally significant nationally significant fishery. Essential for fishery. Important for fishery. Possibly important maintaining fishery. maintaining fishery. for maintaining fishery.

Regional High value habitat in a Medium value habitat in a Low value habitat in a regionally significant regionally significant regionally significant fishery. Important for fishery. Possibly important fishery. Not important for maintaining fishery. for maintaining fishery. maintaining fishery.

Local High value habitat in a Medium value habitat in a Low value habitat in a locally significant fishery. locally significant fishery. locally significant fishery. Possibly important for Not important for Incidental to maintenance maintaining fishery. maintaining fishery. of fishery.

Occasional Incidental to maintenance of fishery.

Even within this conceptual framework, however, the question of which sites are nationally or regionally significant in the sense specified by ECan remains partly subjective, particularly for sites identified as “Locally significant”. The author’s judgment and experience, together with advice from local FGNZ staff, have been used to assess which of these sites should (and should not) be ranked as regionally and locally important, but it is acknowledged that these decisions are not absolute and could potentially be subject to further review.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 16

5. Schedule of significant salmon spawning sites

Forty-eight spawning sites were considered to be at least locally significant on the basis of the above criteria, comprising 18 nationally significant sites, 14 regionally significant sites, and 16 (out of over 70, based on the original LEDB) locally significant sites (Appendix 3, Fig. 2). These are associated with Chinook salmon fisheries in nine catchments, and represent four nationally important fisheries (Waimakariri River, Rakaia River, Rangitata River, Waitaki River); three regionally important fisheries (Hurunui River, Opihi River, and Lake Coleridge); and four locally important fisheries (Waiau River, Ashburton River, Orari River, Lake Heron). In addition, four spawning sites important for sockeye salmon in the upper Waitaki catchment have been identified. No regionally or nationally significant spawning sites were identified in the Clarence River, Lyell Creek, Ashley River, Avon and Heathcote Rivers, Selwyn River, Hinds River, and Pareora River. Salmon are occasionally targeted and caught at the mouths of the Clarence River and Ashley River, but these fisheries are highly episodic and neither is of more than marginal local significance. None of the other rivers listed in the original draft of Schedule WQN 14 is recognised as sustaining a salmon fishery of any significance.

5.1. Nationally significant sites

The 18 spawning sites identified as essential (i.e., nationally important) include well known and well documented headwater streams (such as Winding Creek in the Waimakariri headwaters, the Hydra waters and Glenariffe Stream in the upper Rakaia River, and the and Deep Creek complexes in the upper Rangitata River) which have traditionally been regarded as sustaining the core of the salmon fishery on these three rivers. No such streams are available to salmon in the lower Waitaki River (although they may have been before the Waitaki Dam was completed in 1935), and salmon spawning in this system is widely distributed throughout most of the Waitaki mainstem and the lower reaches of the Hakataramea River rather than locally concentrated as in the other three rivers. The reach of the mainstem upstream of Black Point and Duntroon typically accounts for 75% of the whole river total (James & Deverall 1987), and is clearly a national significance, consistent with its assessment in the LEDB. However, the remainder of the mainstem accounts for most of the remaining 25%, giving it a value (in the context of the lower Waitaki fishery) equivalent to that of Double Hill Flats or Glenariffe Stream to the Rakaia River, or Winding Creek to the Waimakariri. For this reason, the present review considers the whole of the lower Waitaki mainstem, from the Waitaki Dam to SH1, to be national importance. The remaining three sites in this group are all associated with hatchery supplementation programmes, at NIWA’s Silverstream Research Station on the , and FGNZ’s operations at Montrose on the Rakaia River, and (to begin

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 17

in 2007) McKinnon’s Creek on . A case can be made that none of these three sites are important for spawning as such, but this report adopts the pragmatic view that all three are important (or, in the case of McKinnon’s Creek, likely to become important) for maintaining the recreational fishery in the sense defined by ECan, and should therefore be recognised as such.

Salmon Spawning A Sites

1 Kaiapoi River 2 Lower Waitaki River 3 Hakataramea River

B

Waiau River

Hurunui River

C 1 Waimakariri River

D Rakaia River

Ashburton Riv er Rangitata Ri ver Orari River Opihi River

3 100 km

2 Waitaki River

Figure 2: Significant salmon spawning sites (red segments) in the Canterbury region. Sub- regions A-D are plotted at a larger scale in Figures 3-6, showing, respectively, the Waiau and Hurunui catchments (A, Figure 3); the Waimakariri and Rakaia catchments (B, Figure 4); the Ashburton, Rangitata, Orari, and Opihi catchments (C, Figure 5); and the upper Ohau catchment (D, Figure 6).

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 18

5.2. Regionally and locally significant sites

The 30 spawning sites identified as regionally or locally important are primarily associated with high value sites in regionally or (occasionally) locally important fisheries, or with secondary sites in the four nationally important rivers. Each of these fisheries, and the reasons for their inclusion in the revised schedule, is briefly discussed in the following Sections.

5.2.1. Waiau River

The Waiau River is the northernmost river which can consistently be relied on to provide a salmon angling resource each year, and is considered to be of at least local significance. During the period of sustained hatchery releases in the 1980s it was the source of significant numbers of strays from as far south as the Rangitata River. This is in marked contrast to the Clarence River (80 km to the north) which has never been associated with straying despite having a similar mean discharge (~110 m3s-1) to the Waiau, and small but persistent numbers of strays penetrating at least 80 km north of the Clarence River to the Wairau River in Marlborough (Unwin & Quinn 1993). This suggests that the Waiau River is inherently “attractive” to returning salmon, and reinforces its value as a fishery.

The three spawning sites included in the revised schedule correspond to the three sites (out of 14 in the Waiau catchment) identified as high value in the LEDB (Fig. 3). Their assessment as locally important reflects the relatively low angling effort on the Waiau River, particularly compared to the neighbouring Hurunui River where there is good road access to the mouth.

5.2.2. Hurunui River

The Hurunui River sustains what is arguably the most important salmon fishery in Canterbury after the four nationally important rivers. As with the Waiau River, large numbers of strays from rivers to the south (totalling ~2400 over the 18 years from 1980 to 1998) confirm the river’s suitability for salmon.

The LEDB identifies 20 salmon spawning sites within the Hurunui catchment, five of which are identified in Schedule WQN 14 as high value. However, these include two tributaries (Sisters Stream and the North ) which are of relatively minor significance, and the Hurunui North Branch below Lake Sumner, which – while it sustains some spawning – is characterised by large bouldery substrates and is only lightly used. Current FGNZ spawning records indicate that the most important sites

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 19

are Landslip Stream and Homestead Stream (as in the LEDB), together with the main stems of the North Branch above Lake Sumner, and the South Branch above the North Esk confluence (Fig. 3). The locally important rating for the Hurunui North Branch (in contrast to the regionally important rating for the other three sites) reflects the relative usage of the two main branches by spawning fish, with the South Branch generally accounting for a higher and more consistent proportion of the total than the North Branch.

Salmon Spawning Sites 20 km

1 Henry River 2 Waiau River 3 Matagouri Point Stream 2 4 Hurunui North Branch 3 5 Landslip Stream 6 Homestead Stream 7 Hurunui North Branch 1

Waiau River

Waia u 5 4 River

7

Hurunu i 6 River Hurunui River

Figure 3: Significant Chinook salmon spawning sites in the Waiau and Hurunui catchments.

5.2.3. Waimakariri River

The LEDB identifies 43 salmon spawning sites in the Waimakariri catchment, although several of these are contiguous and the number of discrete river sections is

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 20

likely to be somewhat less. Of nine sites identified as high value, only the Waimakariri South Branch (also known as Groynes Stream or Otukaikino Stream) appears to be an anomaly, and the remaining eight have all been included in the revised schedule (Fig. 4). Two more sites in the Poulter River headwaters have been added to reflect the high value of this catchment: the Poulter River mainstem between Casey Stream and Thompson Stream (regionally important), and the lower ~3km of Thompson Stream itself (locally important). Both sites are prone to dry up in some years, but have sustained spawning counts of over 100 fish in other years.

S al mo n Spa wni n g Sit es

1 Winding Creek 10 Glenariffe Stream 2 Poulter River 11 Double Hill Stream 3 Poulter spring creek 1 12 Manuka Point Stream 4 Poulter spring creek 2 13 Hydra Waters 5 Poulter spring creek 3 14 Montrose Creek 6 Thompson Stream 15 Ryton River 6 7 Cass Hill Stream 16 Goat Hill 2 8 One Tree Swamp 17 Hennah Stream 4, 5 9 Cora Lynn Stream 18 Mellish Stream 3 20 km

8 Waimakariri Pou lt er River Riv er 9 7

1

16 12 Rakaia 17 Waimakarir i River 13 River 11 15 Lake 10 Coleridge

Lake 18 14 Heron

Raka ia River

Figure 4: Significant Chinook salmon spawning sites in the Waimakariri and Rakaia catchments.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 21

The Waimakariri is unusual among the four nationally important rivers in having a relatively large number of minor spawning areas scattered throughout the catchment, consistent with the large number of sites (31) identified as low value in the LEDB. These include well documented sites such as Lower Farm Stream, Kowai Stream, Hackett’s Creek (Cowie et al. 1986, Hardy 1989), together with larger tributaries such as the Esk River, , and Poulter River East Branch. However, many of these are either inaccessible to spawning fish in most seasons (e.g., ), or highly unstable (e.g., Hawdon River). It may well be possible to extend the Schedule beyond the ten sites listed, the difficulty being to judge the incremental contribution of each site to the total productivity of the Waimakariri catchment.

5.2.4. Rakaia River

As with the Waimakariri River, the Rakaia River spawning sites listed in Schedule WQN 14 are generally appropriate, and all but one (Lake Stream) have been retained in the revised Schedule (Fig. 4). For sea-run Chinook, these comprise the core group of four spawning streams (Hydra Waters, Glenariffe Stream, Double Hill Stream, Manuka Point) which join the upper river within a ~5 km radius of Double Hill (West & Goode 1987), together with Goat Hill Stream (regionally important) on the west bank of the , which is the largest and most consistently used of the secondary spawning sites. However, the GIS layers for Glenariffe Stream and Double Hill Stream have been extensively revised, as the original layer was based on long- standing but inaccurate representations of these waters on TopoMap Sheet K35. Likewise, the area associated with Manuka Point Stream has been greatly reduced, to reflect the sites actually used by spawning salmon (which rarely venture more than a few km above Manuka Point homestead) rather than the entire stream network as marked on Topomap Sheet J35 (which extends at least 10 km further upstream). The two main streams which sustain the regionally important Lake Coleridge fishery (Ryton River and Hennah Stream) have also been retained as regionally important, together with Mellish Stream above Lake Heron (locally important) which is the major spawning site for the locally important Lake Heron fishery, and is also used intermittently by sea-run Chinook. A final addition to the Schedule is Montrose Stream, the site of FGNZ’s supplementation hatchery above .

5.2.5. Ashburton River

Schedule WQN 14 identifies three high value salmon spawning sites within the Ashburton River system, all of which have been retained in the revised Schedule as locally important sites (Fig. 5). In doing so, it is acknowledged that the Ashburton River is generally regarded as highly degraded, and that the salmon fishery is currently

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 22

well below the level required to justify its former status as locally important (Teirney et al. 1987a, Unwin & Deans 2003). However, as recently as 1960 the fishery appears to have been at least as productive as the Hurunui River is today, with over 1000 salmon taken annually (Webb 2004). Management plans being developed by the Central South Island Region of FGNZ include proposals aimed at restoring the fishery to its former status, and the spawning sites listed in the revised schedule reflect this latent potential rather than the current status quo (see Section 6.2).

Salmon Spawning Sites

1 Ash burton Riv er S Branc h 9 McKinnons Creek 2 Bowyers Stream 10 Orar i River 3 Ma ori Lak e s outflo w 11 Ohapi Creek 4 Dee p Strea m 12 Opihi River 5 Deep Creek 13 Temuka River 6 Bra baz on F an 14 Waihi River 7 Black Mountain St ream 15 Opuha River gorge 8 Ealing Springs 16 Tengawai River 7 4 3 6

2 5

1

Ashburton River

15 8

12 9 14 10 Rangitata River 13 11 Orari River 16 12 Opihi River

20 km

Figure 5: Significant Chinook salmon spawning sites in the Ashburton, Rangitata, Orari, and Opihi catchments.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 23

Existing records are insufficient to establish the whereabouts of the main spawning populations of the 1960s with any certainty. The three streams listed in the LEDB have been surveyed intermittently since the 1970s, with Bowyers Stream showing the most consistent use, and are likely to include most areas where future salmon runs would seek spawning gravels should stocks be restored. If this does not eventuate, the value of these sites to the salmon fishery of the region would need to be reconsidered.

5.2.6. Rangitata River

The Rangitata River salmon fishery is unusual in being dominated by just two tributaries, known locally as Deep Creek and Deep Stream, which jointly account for around 90% of spawning. The remaining 10% is more widely distributed, with a further 16 sites identified in the LEDB. Schedule WQN 14 currently list six sites in total, including Deep Creek and Deep Stream together with three of the more consistently used secondary sites and one (McKinnon’s Creek) which is associated with FGNZ (Central South Island Region)’s proposed hatchery supplementation programme.

All six sites have been retained in the revised Schedule (Fig. 5). Deep Creek, Deep Stream, and McKinnon’s Creek have been assessed as nationally significant, although given that the extent to which McKinnon’s Creek will actually contribute to future spawning runs has yet to be established it would be appropriate to regard this status as provisional. The remaining three sites have been assessed as regionally or locally significant, their main value being that they provide a reserve of significant secondary spawning sites which may serve as repositories of genetic diversity within the Rangitata catchment, and provide a “safety net” in the event that either of the two major sites fails in any one season.

5.2.7. Orari River

The Orari River is of no more than local significance, but sustains a moderate amount of angling activity at its mouth in most seasons with counts of up to 400 redds in some seasons (Webb 2004). Significant recaptures of strays from hatcheries on the Rakaia River and Tentburn (the latter operated by New Zealand King Salmon Ltd.) confirm that the river is attractive to salmon, and suggest that runs may well be larger and more dependable if adequate spawning habitat can be maintained.

Two spawning sites are listed in Schedule WQN 14, and both have been retained in the revised Schedule (Fig. 5). However, they have been graded as locally significant, reflecting the local scale of the Orari fishery.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 24

5.2.8. Opihi River

The Opihi River salmon fishery has declined substantially since its apparent heyday in the 1960s and 1970s, but is still of regional significance. Annual spawning counts generally fluctuate between 200 and 400 redds, implying spawning populations of at least double that number, but have been as high as 1000 redds within the last 10-15 years (Webb 2004). A distinguishing feature of the fishery is the extent to which spawning is distributed throughout the catchment, rather than being concentrated in a few well defined tributaries as in most other salmon producing rivers. Recent estimates of the proportion of total spawning within each section are 40% for the Opihi mainstem from the Temuka River junction to Fairlie, 25% for the Temuka and lower Waihi River, 20% for the Tengawai River, and 10% for the Opuha River (Webb 2004).

The LEDB identifies 16 spawning sites within the Opihi catchment, but many of these are contiguous sections of the Opihi mainstem or one of its larger tributaries and are contained within one of the four stream sections listed above. Three of these – the lower 20 km of the Opihi River, the Tengawai River, and the Temuka River – are listed in Schedule WQN 14. These three sections have been retained in the revised Schedule (Fig. 5), but with some revision of their upstream boundaries to reflect current usage data. In addition, a small section of the Waihi River upstream of the Temuka confluence has been included, together with the Opuha River from Skipton Bridge to within about 2 km of the Opuha Dam. Flows in this section have become much more stable since the dam was commissioned, and it is now the most heavily used section of the Opuha River.

5.2.9. Waitaki River

As noted earlier, salmon spawning in the Waitaki is essentially limited to the Waitaki mainstem, and the Hakataramea River (its main lowland tributary). Schedule WQN 14 includes both sections in its list of important spawning sites, and both have been retained in the revised Schedule (Fig. 2). However, upstream and/or downstream limits for both sections have been revised to better reflect current spawning records, with the Waitaki mainstem now including the entire length of the river between the SH 1 bridge and the Waitaki Dam, and the Hakataramea River limited to the ~30 km below the Cattle Creek bridge (rather than the entire river as in Schedule WQN 14).

Four new sites (all classed as locally important) used by spawning sockeye salmon have also included (Fig. 6). Sockeye salmon have historically been very abundant in Lakes Benmore and Aviemore in some seasons, although runs declined markedly after completion of in the early 1980s and they provide more of a novelty

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 25

fishery than one which is regularly targeted. However, the upper Waitaki stocks are of considerable scientific interest, representing a highly unusual life history variant which shows evidence of a genetic shift from the ancestral North American stock (Graynoth 1995, Quinn et al. 1998).

Salmon Spawning Sites

1 Larch Stream 2 Stockyard Creek 3 Ohau tributary 1 4 Ohau tributary 2

2

1

Lake Pukaki

Lake Ohau

4

10 km 3

L ake B enmor e

Figure 6: Significant sockeye salmon spawning sites in the upper Ohau catchment.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 26

6. Discussion

6.1. The revised Schedule

The revised Schedule of salmon spawning sites developed in this review attempts to resolve all of the major inconsistencies in the existing Schedule WQN 14. Particular attention has been given to the angling value of each major fishery or catchment, and the spatial extent of each site which is specifically relevant to spawning salmon, rather than to salmonid fishes generally. These have resulted in seven of the sixteen catchments originally identified in Schedule WQN 14 being dropped altogether, some changes to the individual sites included or excluded within each catchment, and numerous changes to the upstream and downstream geographical limits for each site. Other changes reflect the addition of sites in the Waimakariri catchment (which were excluded from the original Schedule), inclusion of sites used by landlocked sockeye salmon, and changes to the GIS layers for several upper Rakaia River sites to correct long-standing errors in their representation in Topomap Series NZMS260.

As noted earlier, categorising individual sites as nationally or regionally significant remains partly subjective. In addition, site values may change over time scales of 5-10 years or more, in response to natural events such as floods and associated changes in riverbed morphology. The coordinates marking the upstream and downstream extent of each site should be verified by ground truthing before taking any management action, and should also be reviewed occasionally at intervals consistent with likely changes in usage patterns.

6.2. Degraded fisheries

In assessing the current status of salmon fisheries in the Canterbury region, this review has focussed on the recent (10-20 year) historical record. This approach is consistent with ECan’s guidelines for the review (following preliminary discussions as to its scope and objectives), and the timeframe adopted when compiling the LEDB, but risks overlooking historically important fisheries which are now degraded to the point where they are no longer viable. As noted in Section 5.2.5, the Ashburton River is probably the prime example of such a fishery, and its retention in the revised Schedule is a conscious attempt to highlight its potential value to future generations rather than its present value. Indeed, it could be argued that – from the perspective of boosting the salmon angling resource within the Canterbury region – providing anglers with an extra 1000 fish in the Ashburton River would make a far more significant contribution than putting an equivalent number into an established fishery such as the Rakaia or Rangitata.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 27

Similar arguments could equally well apply to the Opihi River and Hataramea River, as well as to several smaller rivers (such as the Maerewhenua and Waihao) which receive scant mention in the LEDB, and in this review. Should planning initiatives wish to take a longer term view, it would be important to retain the ability to promote restoration or rehabilitation of formerly productive waters which might otherwise be “written off”. While some such waters may now have very limited potential, others may still be amenable to more interventionist or protective management strategies to restore some or all of their former value. For these reasons, the present report should be interpreted as an assessment of the current status quo, rather than defining the scope of the Canterbury salmon fishery for all time. Should ECan wish to pursue future enhancement or restoration options, further consultation with end users (particularly FGNZ) would be appropriate to better identify candidate rivers and spawning waters.

6.3. Definition of spawning “sites”

Use of the term “site” to describe individual spawning waters is potentially misleading, as it tends to imply a relatively localised area only a few kilometres in extent rather than an extended section of mainstem. Many sites identified in the LEDB and in this review (such as those in the Waimakariri, Rakaia, and Rangitata headwaters) are indeed quite localised, but others (e.g., the Opihi and Waitaki mainstems) are up to 40 km long. It is beyond the scope of this review to consider how such sites should be managed (or whether they should be given special consideration at all), other than to make the obvious point that practical management options for an extended section of river such as the Opihi mainstem are likely to be very different from those for waters such as Deep Creek and Glenariffe Stream. Adopting a more encompassing terminology (e.g., spawning areas, sections, or rivers) may help to facilitate dialogue between those advocating for their protection and those charged with implementing practical strategies for achieving this.

7. Acknowledgements

I thank Raymond Ford (ECan) for his help in guiding this review, Adrian Meredith (ECan) and Gavin James (NIWA) for reviewing an earlier draft, Herb Familton (ECan) for reminding the author that the Waitaki Valley extends into North Otago, and Ryan Elley (ECan) and Helen Hurren (NIWA, Christchurch) for GIS help.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 28

8. References

Bonnett, M.L.; Davis, S.F.; Unwin, M.J. (1991). Angler surveys of the Hurunui River, 1979/80 - 1981/82. New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Report 123. 18 p.

Cowie, B.; Lineham, I.W.; Lovis, P.M. (1986). Waimakariri River and catchment resource survey Volume 2. North Canterbury Catchment Board and Regional Water Board, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Davis, S.F.; Unwin, M.J.; Zeldis, J.R.; Hayes, J.W. (1987). Angler use of the Rangitata River salmon and trout fisheries. New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Report 85. 109 p.

Deans, N.C.; Unwin, M.J.; Rodway, M. (2004). Sport fishery management. In: Harding, J.S.; Mosley, M.P.; Pearson, C.P.; Sorrell, B.K. (eds). Freshwaters of New Zealand, New Zealand Hydrological Society Inc. and New Zealand Limnological Society Inc., Christchurch, pp. 41.41-41.16.

Graynoth, E. (1995). Spawning migrations and reproduction of landlocked sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in the Waitaki catchment, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 29: 257-269.

Hardy, C.J. (1989). Quinnat salmon spawning in the Waimakariri catchment. New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Report 114. 65 p.

James, G.D. (1992). Chinook salmon angler catch and effort for the lower Waitaki River, 1985-1987. New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Report 132. 16 p.

James, G.D.; Deverall, K.R. (1987). Quinnat salmon spawning in the lower Waitaki and Hakataramea Rivers, 1959-1986. New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Report 93. 39 p.

Jellyman, D.J.; Eder, R.M.; Hardy, C.J. (1987). Recreational and angling surveys of the Waimakariri River. New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Report 86. 57 p.

Jellyman, D.J.; Graynoth, E. (1994). Headwater trout fisheries in New Zealand. New Zealand Freshwater Research Report 12. 87 p.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 29

Kinnison, M.T.; Bentzen, P.; Unwin, M.J.; Quinn, T.P. (2002). Reconstructing recent divergence: evaluating non-equilibrium population structure in New Zealand chinook salmon. Molecular Ecology 11: 739-754.

Kinnison, M.T.; Unwin, M.J.; Boustead, N.C.; Quinn, T.P. (1998a). Population- specific variation in body dimensions of adult chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) from New Zealand and their source population, 90 years after introduction. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55: 554-563.

Kinnison, M.T.; Unwin, M.J.; Hershberger, W.K.; Quinn, T.P. (1998b). Egg size, fecundity, and development rate of two introduced New Zealand chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) populations. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55: 1946-1953.

Kinnison, M.T.; Unwin, M.J.; Quinn, T.P. (1998c). Growth and salinity tolerance of juvenile chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) from two introduced New Zealand populations. Canadian Journal of Zoology 76: 2219-2226.

Langlands, P.; Elley, R. (2000). Survey of salmonid distribution and habitats in the Canterbury region. Unpublished report U00/31. 37 p.

McDowall, R.M. (1994). Gamekeepers for the nation. Canterbury University Press, Christchurch.

National Water and Soil Conservation Organisation. (1982). A draft for a national inventory of wild and scenic rivers. Part 1: nationally important rivers. Water & Soil Miscellaneous Publication 42. 64 p.

Nelson, J.S.; Crossman, E.J.; Espinosa-Pérez, H.; Findley, L.T.; Gilbert, C.R.; Lea, R.N.; Williams, J.D. (2003). The "Names of Fishes" list, including recommended changes in fish names: Chinook salmon for chinook salmon, and Sander to replace Stizostedion for the sauger and walleye. Fisheries 28(7): 38-39.

Pierce, L.A.; Smith, J.J.L. (1989). Angling postal questionnaires schemes on the lower Waitaki River, 1980/81 and 1981/82. New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Report 106. 35 p.

Quinn, T.P.; Graynoth, E.; Wood, C.C.; Foote, C.J. (1998). Genotypic and phenotypic divergence of sockeye salmon in New Zealand from their ancestral British

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 30

Columbia populations. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 127: 517- 534.

Quinn, T.P.; Kinnison, M.T.; Unwin, M.J. (2001). Evolution of chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) populations in New Zealand: pattern, rate, and process. Genetica 112-113: 493-513.

Quinn, T.P.; Unwin, M.J.; Kinnison, M.T. (2000). Evolution of temporal isolation in the wild: genetic divergence in timing of migration and breeding by introduced chinook salmon populations. Evolution 54: 1372-1385.

Teirney, L.D.; Richardson, J. (1992). Attributes that characterize angling rivers of importance in New Zealand, based on angler use and perceptions. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 12: 693-702.

Teirney, L.D.; Richardson, J.; Unwin, M.J. (1982a). The relative value of South Canterbury rivers to South Canterbury anglers: a preliminary report. Fisheries Environmental Report 17. 46 p.

Teirney, L.D.; Richardson, J.; Unwin, M.J. (1982b). The relative value of Waitaki Valley rivers to Waitaki Valley anglers: a preliminary report. Fisheries Environmental Report 19. 46 p.

Teirney, L.D.; Richardson, J.; Unwin, M.J. (1987a). The relative value of Ashburton rivers to New Zealand anglers. New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Report 78. 70 p.

Teirney, L.D.; Richardson, J.; Unwin, M.J. (1987b). The relative value of North Canterbury rivers to New Zealand anglers. New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Report 89. 113 p.

Teirney, L.D.; Unwin, M.J.; Rowe, D.K.; McDowall, R.M.; Graynoth, E. (1982c). Submission on the draft inventory of wild and scenic rivers of national importance. Fisheries Environmental Report 28. 122 p.

Terry, S. (2005). 2004-2005 salmon management report. Unpublished internal report 13 p.

Unwin, M.J. (1991). Postal surveys of angling in the Rakaia and other Canterbury rivers, 1986/87 and 1987/88. New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Report 124. 35 p.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 31

Unwin, M.J. (1997a). Fry-to-adult survival of naturally and hatchery produced chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) from a common origin. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54: 1246-1254.

Unwin, M.J. (1997b). Survival of chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, from a spawning tributary of the Rakaia River, New Zealand, in relation to spring and summer mainstem flows. Fishery Bulletin 95: 812-825.

Unwin, M.J. (2000). Requiem for the sockeye. Fish & Game New Zealand 28: 21-28.

Unwin, M.J.; Brown, S. (1998). The geography of freshwater angling in New Zealand: A summary of results from the 1994/96 National Angling Survey. NIWA Client Report CHC98/33. 78 p.

Unwin, M.J.; Davis, S.F. (1983). Recreational fisheries of the Rakaia River. Fisheries Environmental Report 35. 110 p.

Unwin, M.J.; Deans, N. (2003). Travel distance as an index of angling value: a preliminary study based on the 2001/02 National Angling Survey. NIWA Client Report CHC2003-113. 24 p.

Unwin, M.J.; Image, K. (2003). Angler usage of lake and river fisheries managed by Fish & Game New Zealand: results from the 2001/02 National Angling Survey. NIWA Client Report CHC2003-114. 48 p.

Unwin, M.J.; Kinnison, M.T.; Boustead, N.C.; Quinn, T.P. (2003). Genetic control over survival in Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.): experimental evidence between and within populations of New Zealand chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 60: 1-11.

Unwin, M.J.; Lucas, D.H.; Gough, T. (1988). Coded-wire tagging of juvenile chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in New Zealand, 1977-81: release programmes and returns at maturity. Fisheries Data Report 33. 50 p.

Unwin, M.J.; Quinn, T.P. (1993). Homing and straying patterns of chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) from a New Zealand hatchery: spatial distribution of strays and effects of release date. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50: 1168-1175.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 32

Unwin, M.J.; Quinn, T.P.; Kinnison, M.T.; Boustead, N.C. (2000). Divergence in juvenile growth and life history in two recently colonized and partially isolated chinook salmon populations. Journal of Fish Biology 57: 943-960.

Webb, M. (2004). Salmon in the Central South Island - the state of the fishery in 2004. Unpublished internal report 20 p.

West, I.F.; Goode, R.H. (1986). Postal surveys of anglers fishing for sea-run chinook salmon on the Rakaia River, Canterbury, New Zealand, 1973/74 and 1974/75. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 20: 345-354.

West, I.F.; Goode, R.H. (1987). Aerial counts of spawning chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) on the Rakaia River system, Canterbury, New Zealand, 1973-76. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 21: 563-572.

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region 33

Appendix 1. Significant salmon spawning sites as listed in Schedule WQN14 of Langlands & Elley (2000).

Downstream Upstream Catchment River/stream/reach name Upstream Location Description Downstream Location Description Reference Reference

Clarence Clarence River Upland Confluence of Nightingale Stream with Clarence River Confluence of Clarence River with Acheron River N31:073-683 N31:913-827 (Upstream Acheron Influence) (approximately 4.2km downstream of Tophouse Road (approximately 2.3km downstream of Acheron bridge over Clarence River). Accommodation House).

Lyell Creek Lyell Creek Approx 800m upstream of Mill Road crossing. Lyell Creek entrance to sea. O31:664-669 O31:652-700

Waiau Henry River Approx 8.9km upstream Henry River from confluence with Confluence of Henry River with Waiau River M31:769-737 M31:688-732 Waiau River.

Waiau River - headwaters Approximately 15.3km upstream Waiau River from Confluence of Ada River with Waiau River. M31:777-762 M31:820-898 confluence with Ada River.

Matagouri Point Stream Approximately 2.7km upstream Matagouri Stream from Confluence of Matagouri Stream with Waiau River. M31:790-811 M31:790-836 confluence with Waiau River.

Hurunui Hurunui River - north branch Exit from Lake Sumner Confluence of North Branch Hurunui River with Jollie Brook. M33:558-236 M32:506-314

Landslip Stream Approx 4.25km upstream Landslip Stream from confluence Confluence of Landslip Stream with North Branch Hurunui L32:319-347 L32:287-350 with North Branch Hurunui River. River (just below Matagouri Flat).

Sisters Stream Lake Sheppard Confluence of Sisters Stream with the Hurunui River M33:545-254 L33:492-262

North Esk River Unspecified distance upstream of the Hurunui South Branch Confluence of North Esk River with the Hurunui South L33:475-214 L33:332-234 Branch

Homestead Creek Unspecified distance upstream of the Hurunui South Branch Confluence of Homestead Creek with the Hurunui South L33: 448-227 L33:415-247 Branch

Ashley Townshend Stream Confluence of Dobson Stream with Townshend River Confluence of Townshend River with Ashley River. L34:401-793 L34:332-787 (approx 300m upstream Townshend River from Townshend Huts).

Broom Stream Broom Stream at Lees Valley Road crossing. Confluence of Broom Stream with Ashley River (approx L34:436-820 L34:434-844 2.8km downstream Broom Stream from Lees Valley Road crossing).

Avon Avon River Confluence of Ilam Stream and Waimari Stream into Avon Avon River at Hurley Street - Oxford Terrace intersection. M35:814-424 M35:784-426 River.

Downstream Upstream Catchment River/stream/reach name Upstream Location Description Downstream Location Description Reference Reference

Heathcote Heathcote River (mid) Confluence of Cashmere Stream with Heathcote River (at Heathcote River at Hume Road - Eastern Terrace M36:817-392 M36:791-370 Cashmere Road crossing). intersection.

Rakaia Glenariffe Stream Top of Genariffe Stream (approx. 4.8km from confluence Confluence of Glenariffe Stream with Double Hill Stream K35:776-647 K35:731-647 with Double Hill Stream).

Double Hill Stream Approx 3.6km upstream Double Hill Stream from Double Hill Confluence of Double Hill Stream with Rakaia River K35:782-649 K35:702-668 Run Road bridge.

Manuka Point Stream Base of foothills below stream headwaters. Confluence of Manuka Point Stream and Rakaia River J35:679-680 J35:543-671

Hydra waters, Titan Stream, 8.5 km upstream of confluence with Rakaia River Confluence of Titan Stream with Rakaia River K35:771-684 K34:700-705 Chimera Stream

Ryton River Approx 11km upstream Ryton River from entrance to Lake Entrance of Ryton River into Lake Coleridge K35:905-678 K34:954-746 Coleridge.

Goat Hill Two streams in the Goat Hill system which flow across a K34:785-742 stable tussock flat to the Wilberforce River

Hennah Stream Exit of Hennah Stream from Lake Evelyn Confluence of Hennah Stream with Ryton River. K35:918-692 K34:913-713

Lake Stream-Lake Heron Upstream of Lake Stream confluence with the Rakaia River Head of Lake Heron J35:600:650 J35: 610-442 inclusive of Lake Heron

Mellish Stream Approximately 4.2 km upstream of in Harrisons Bight inlet, Inlet of Mellish Stream to Harrisons Bight, Lake Heron J35:656-470 J35:656-470 Lake Heron .

Ashburton Ashburton River - South Branch Confluence of Bowyers Stream and South Branch Confluence of South and North branches of Ashburton K37:075-016 K36:922-177 Ashburton River (approx 700m downstream of Mayfield River (approx 3km upstream of SH1 bridge). Valetta Road bridge).

Bowyers Stream Confluence of the Mill Creek with Bowyers Stream (approx Approximately 2.9km downstream Bowyers Stream from K36:899-203 K36:841-276 250m upstream Bowyers Creek from Boyds Road crossing). Hepburns Road crossing.

Māori Lakes outflow Exit from Māori Lakes (approx 510m upstream Māori Lakes Confluence of Māori Lakes outflow with Ashburton River J36:626-330 J36:630-352 outflow from Hakatere Heron Road crossing). South Branch (approx 1.9km downstream Ashburton River South Branch from Hakatere Heron Road crossing).

Rangitata Deep Stream Complex - Approx 500m upstream Scour Stream from Rangitata Confluence of Scour Stream with Rangitata River. J36:464-241 J36:410-264 Mesopotamia crossing.

Downstream Upstream Catchment River/stream/reach name Upstream Location Description Downstream Location Description Reference Reference

Deep Creek Complex - Mt Potts Approximately 2.3 km south west of Rabbit Hill Confluence of Deep Creek complex with Rangitata River J36:414-339 J36:390-390 (approximately 3 km west of Potts Road Bridge over )

Brabazon Fan Unnamed tributaries of the Rangitata River Confluence with the Rangitata River J36: 390-316

Black Mountain Stream Unnamed tributaries of the Rangitata River Confluence with the Rangitata River J36:348:379

Ealing Springs Unnamed tributaries of the Rangitata River Confluence with the Rangitata River K37:824-831

McKinnons Creek Unnamed tributary of the Rangitata River known as Confluence with the Rangitata River K38:893-702 McKinnons Creek

Orari Orari River - Lower Section Orari River at Victoria Bridge. Orari River mouth. K38:828-617 K38:745-740

Ohapi Creek South Road crossing over Ohapi Creek South Branch Confluence with the mouth of the Orari River. K38:824-616 (K38:736-669); approx 370m upstream Factory Road crossing Ohapi Creek Middle Branch (K38:756-665); approx 2.8km upstream of Milford Clandeboye Road crossing Ohapi Creek Middle Branch (K38:782-650)

Opihi Opihi River Lower Confluence of Tengawai River with Opihi River (approx Entrance to Opihi River mouth (approx 7km downstream of K38:782-574 J38:610-606 800m upstream of Waitohi Pleasant Point Road bridge over SH1 bridge over Opihi River). Opihi River).

Temuka River Ford at Oxford Crossing Road Confluence of Temuka River with Opihi River (approx 3.5km K38:752-593 K38:714-634 downstream of SH1 bridge over Opihi River).

Tengawai River Approx 2.8km downstream Tengawai River from Albury Confluence of Tengawai River with Opihi River (approx J38:610-606 J38:420-599 Monument. 800m upstream of Waitohi Pleasant Point Road bridge over Opihi River).

Waitaki Lower Waitaki River Waitaki Dam. Approx 24km downstream Waitaki River from Waimate- I40:296-922 I40:061-102 Kurow Highway bridge.

Hakataramea River Confluence of Dalgety Stream with Hakataramea River Confluence of Hakataramea River with Waitaki River. I40:109-057 I39:215-481

Appendix 2: Sites identified by Langlands & Elley (2000) as being used by spawning salmon. Hab_No refers to the original number used to identify each site in the corresponding GIS layer; CSType identifies the type of spawning habitat (CS = sea-run Chinook salmon, CT = lake-limited Chinook salmon, ST = sockeye salmon); and CSVal is the value of the site as listed in the LEDB. Comments are those originally given by Langlands & Elley (2000), and include some minor typographical errors inherited from the original electronic source.

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

6 Clarence Clarence River Upland (Upstream CS High High recreational fisheries value. NB. most salmon spawning in Acheron Acheron Influence)

7 Clarence Leaderdale Stream CS Medium

11 Clarence Clarence River - CS Low High densities of brown trout juveniles recorded. outflow

16 Lyell Creek Lyell Creek CS High Trout fisheries of local importance.

32 Waiau Waiau River CS Low Other threats - loss of brown trout and Chinook salmon into Waiau Irrigation Scheme.

37 Waiau Home Stream CS Low Chinook salmon ova planted.

38 Waiau Rotherham Stream CS Low Amuri Salmon Farm outflows into stream.

45 Waiau Waiau River CS Low

49 Waiau - mid CS Low Extensive damage to river bed by cattle. Outstanding value as headwater trout fishery.

50 Waiau Hope River upper CS Low Cattle damage to river bed. Chinook salmon ova planted.

51 Waiau Kiwi River CS Medium Cattle damage to river banks. Flood prone. Chinook salmon ova planted.

53 Waiau Boyle River CS Low River flood prone. Limited value to salmonids. Headwater fishery.

54 Waiau Boyle River - upper CS Low High value as a headwater fishery.

55 Waiau Doubtful River CS Low River flood prone. Limited value to spawning brown trout. Headwater fishery.

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

58 Waiau Henry River CS High Excellent spawning gravels

60 Waiau Waiau River - headwaters CS High

61 Waiau Ada River CS Medium Cattle disturbance to spawning gravels.

63 Waiau Matagouri Point Stream CS High

72 Hurunui Pahau River CS Low Salmonid loss down irrigation races.

73 Hurunui School Creek CS Low Salmon ova planted. Natural salmon spawning occurs.

74 Hurunui Waitohi River CS Medium

75 Hurunui Mandamus River CS Medium

76 Hurunui Dry Stream CS Low Regularly dries up. High potential for spawning salmonids.

77 Hurunui Hurunui River - upper gorge CS Medium No detailed Salmonid surveys.

78 Hurunui Glenrae River CS Low No detailed fisheries survey.

80 Hurunui Hurunui River - south branch mid CS Low Important for salmonid spawning in main river and associated side channels. section

81 Hurunui Hurunui River - south branch - upper CS Medium Main salmon spawning area, Hurunui River. Important for salmonid section spawning in main river and associated side channels.

82 Hurunui Homestead Stream CS Low to High Salmon eyed planted into stream. High level of annual variability in numbers of spawning salmon.

83 Hurunui North Esk River CS Low Limited spawning habitat.

84 Hurunui Seaward River CS Low

86 Hurunui Jollie Brook CS Low

87 Hurunui Hurunui River - north branch CS High Densities of trout recorded in river of national significance. Presence of rainbow trout in river doubtful.

88 Hurunui Sisters Stream CS Low

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

103 Hurunui Hurunui River north branch - upper CS Medium Current status of rainbow trout population doubtful.

104 Hurunui McMillan Creek CS Low

105 Hurunui Landslip Stream CS Medium Most important spawning site for river-run salmon within catchment.

107 Hurunui Hurunui River north branch CS Low

108 Hurunui Greta River CS Low

117 Ashley Ashley River CS Low River dries up in Summer-Autumn Brown trout and Chinook salmon salvaged. Presence of spawning Chinook Salmon historical (Bonnett 1982).

119 Ashley Okuku River CS Low Presence of spawning Chinook salmon historical (Bonnett 1982).

121 Ashley Ashley River CS Low Presence of spawning Chinook salmon historical. River dries up seasonally (Summer - Autumn). Brown trout salvaged.

123 Ashley Ashley River Gorge CS Low Current status of rainbow trout population uncertain.

124 Ashley Townsend Stream CS High Unstable riverbed.

125 Ashley Ashley River CS Medium Unstable riverbed.

126 Ashley Whistler River CS Low Unstable riverbed

127 Ashley Broom Stream CS High

130 Ashley Duck Creek CS Medium

131 Ashley Lilliburn River CS Low Unstable riverbed.

138 Waimakariri Kaiapoi River - upper CS High Chinook salmon spawn at Silverstream Hatchery. Occasional Chinook salmon spawns in main river. Brown trout spawning concentrated between Mabers to Harper Roads.

146 Waimakariri Waimakariri River CS Low No. Flow diversion into Ashley River proposed. Chinook salmon spawning occasionally reported during low flows in mainstem.

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

147 Waimakariri Waimakariri River south branch CS High Rainbow trout periodically stocked. Chinook salmon eyed ova planted. High value to naturally spawning Chinook salmon. High value recreational fishery. Lack of effective fish screens to prevent salmonid loss from river into G isions proposed. Threats - removal of riparian vegetation. Live stock damage to river bank.

148 Waimakariri Hacketts Creek CS Medium Stream enhancement work done by Salmon Anglers Association and Stream Help. Salmon ova planted. High potential for spawning salmonids.

149 Waimakariri Lower Farm Stream CS Low Cattle damage to spawning gravels. Periodically disconnected to Waimakariri due to changes in course of Waimakariri river channel. High potential for spawning salmonids. Streams flood plain being eroded away by Waimakariri Ri

150 Waimakariri Riversdale Stream CS Low

151 Waimakariri Spring Creek CS Low

153 Waimakariri Kowai Stream CS Low River bed unstable and flood prone.

154 Waimakariri Rubicon River CS Low River course unstable. Dam proposed.

157 Waimakariri Esk River CS Low Riverbed unstable and flood prone. River frequently discoloured hence no detailed surveys of salmonids.

158 Waimakariri Nigger Stream CS Low Unstable riverbed. Low flows.

162 Waimakariri Broken River CS Medium Outstanding recreational fishery. Important habitat for juvenile rainbow trout (smolt). Headwater fishery. Catch and release fishery.

163 Waimakariri Slovens' Creek CS Low Waterfall limiting fish passage. Salmon smolt released into creek.

164 Waimakariri Winding Creek CS High Most significant spawning site for Chinook salmon in the Waimakariri Catchment. Rainbow and brown trout salvaged. High value to brown trout smolt.

165 Waimakariri Broken River - upper CS Low Important area for rainbow trout smolts.

166 Waimakariri Porter River CS Low

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

167 Waimakariri Dry Stream/Spring Creek CS Low Rainbow trout ova planted.

171 Waimakariri Waimakariri River - upper CS Low

172 Waimakariri Poulter River CS Medium

173 Waimakariri Poulter River East Branch CS Low No detailed salmonid surveys.

174 Waimakariri Cox Stream CS Low Flood prone unstable riverbed. No detailed salmonid surveys.

175 Waimakariri Poulter River CS Low Riverbed occasionally dries up in upper reaches.

176 Waimakariri Poulter River Spring Creek No 1 CS High Outstanding value for spawning Chinook salmon.

177 Waimakariri Poulter River Spring Creek No 2 CS High Outstanding value for spawning Chinook salmon.

178 Waimakariri Poulter River Spring Creek No 3 CS High Outstanding value for spawning Chinook Salmon.

180 Waimakariri Lake Minchin CS Low Status of brown trout population uncertain.

181 Waimakariri Thompson Stream CS Low Frequently dries up. Limited value to Salmonids.

182 Waimakariri Upper Poulter CS Low Frequently dries up.

183 Waimakariri Cass Hill Stream CS High Bulldozer used to improve instream substrate for Chinook salmon (1989)

184 Waimakariri Andrews Stream CS Low Habitat for juvenile brown trout Limited spawning habitat for brown trout.

185 Waimakariri Cass River CS Low Unstable riverbed. Flood prone.

186 Waimakariri Waimakariri River - upper CS Low Unstable riverbed. Flood prone.

187 Waimakariri Hawdon River CS Low Unstable riverbed. Flood prone.

188 Waimakariri One Tree Swamp CS High Cattle disturbance to spawning shingles.

189 Waimakariri Cora-Lynn Stream CS High Disturbance to spawning Chinook salmon gravels. Electric fence placed to exclude cattle. Intermittent connection to main river channel (Waimakariri River).

190 Waimakariri Turkey Flat Creek CS Low Intermittently connected to main river (Waimakariri River).

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

191 Waimakariri CS Low No detailed salmonid surveys. Unstable riverbed. Rainbow trout ova planted.

192 Waimakariri Craigieburn Stream CS Low Low flows. Trout have been salvaged.

199 Waimakariri Grasmere Stream CS Low Cattle disturbance to river banks. Willow debris blocking salmonid access. High spawning potential for salmonids.

202 Waimakariri Mouth to Floodgates CS Low

203 Waimakariri Styx River CS Low

204 Waimakariri Styx River CS Low Water diverted from river for artificially created ponds. Siltation is a major concern because of its impact on brown trout spawning gravels. Instream dumping of rubbish is a concern.

205 Waimakariri Styx River CS Low Chinook Salmon spawning reported. High potential for spawning Brown Trout compromised by excessive siltation over spawning gravels. Instream dumping of rubbish is a concern.

210 Avon/Heathcote Avon River CS High Mona Vale weir limits upstream passage for spawning salmonids. Siltation is a major threat to the availability of suitable spawning gravels for salmonids. Resident trout population of brown trout has declined markedly since 1 and Chinook salmon reported.

213 Avon/Heathcote Ilam Stream CS Low Chinook salmon smolt released.

215 Avon/Heathcote Heathcote River (mid) CS High Rainbow trout alevins released. Significant spawning gravels for Chinook salmon and brown trout Poaching of salmonids.

217 Avon/Heathcote Heathcote River - (upper) CS Low Significant enhancement of riparian habitat by Christchurch City Council

233 Selwyn Selwyn River CS Low Construction of culvert at Coes Ford may restrict fish passage. Historically large spawning migrations of 10,000's of brown trout reported. Brown trout salvaged during periods of low flow. Dairy farm effluent.

263 Rakaia Koopmans Creek CS Medium Creek habitat enhanced for spawning. Chinook salmon ova planted in conjunction with Rakaia Salmon Fishing Promotions and NCFG.

265 Rakaia Rakaia River upper CS Low Holding pools of high importance to pre-spawning Chinook salmon.

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

266 Rakaia Rakaia River - upper mainstem CS Low Mainstem unstable and flood prone. No detailed salmonid surveys.

267 Rakaia Acheron River CS Low Water flow diverted into Archeron Diversion.

268 Rakaia Lake Coleridge tailrace CS Low Brown trout salvaged when power station was shut down.

270 Rakaia Wilberforce River - lower CS Medium Impoundment proposal next to Little Goat Hill (NCFG Management Plan 1999) Riverbed unstable and flood prone. Run of Chinook salmon up Wilberforce estimated at less than 200 fish (B.Ross pers.comm 1999). Headwater brown trout

271 Rakaia Lower Goat Stream CS Medium

272 Rakaia Little Goat Stream CS Medium

273 Rakaia Wilberforce River - upper CS Low No detailed salmonid surveys. River bed unstable and flood prone.

274 Rakaia Glenariffe Stream CS High Fish Hatchery for Chinook salmon operated by NIWA until 1999. Chinook salmon ova planted into stream. Chinook salmon releases from Glenariffe hatchery contribute up to half of Rakaia salmon run (F.Lucas pers comm 1999). Hat r. Importance of stream for spawning rainbow trout uncertain. One of four most important tributaries for spawning Chinook Salmon in Rakaia catchment.

275 Rakaia Double Hill Stream CS High Erosion of river flats at Double Hill by main stem Rakaia threatens stream. One of four most important tributaries for spawning Chinook salmon in Rakaia catchment.

276 Rakaia Manuka Point Stream CS High One of four most important tributaries for spawning Chinook salmon in the Rakaia catchment.

277 Rakaia Hydra Waters CS High One of four most important tributaries for spawning Chinook salmon in the Rakaia catchment. Headwater brown trout fishery.

278 Rakaia Mathias River CS Low Riverbed unstable and flood prone. Headwater trout fishery. No detailed salmonid surveys.

279 Rakaia Lake Stream CS/CT Low/Medium Willow debris restrict fish passage. Important spawning stream for salmonids from Lake Heron. Headwater trout fishery.

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

287 Rakaia Scamander Stream CT Low Gorse debris restrict fish passage. Poaching. High level of annual variability in numbers of spawning brown and rainbow trout. Important for spawning brown trout.

288 Rakaia Simois Stream CT Medium Instream shingle reworked to enhance quality of spawning gravels. Regionally important for spawning brown trout. Gorse debris restrict fish passage. Important spawning stream.

289 Rakaia Ryton River CT High Most important spawning stream for land-locked salmon in the Lake Coleridge system. Long term decline in numbers of spawning rainbow trout (NCFG 1997)

290 Rakaia Hennah Stream CT High Instream sediments removed by a digger to improve spawning habitat. Brown trout excluded from stream by a fish barrier to prevent damage to Chinook salmon redds. Gorse debris threaten fish passage. Poaching

298 Rakaia Lake Catherine Outflow CT Low Infilling of stream bed by shingle slides.

305 Rakaia - Lower CS Low Artificial barriers restrict fish passage into both Lake Coleridge and Rakaia Rivers. Regionally significant Rainbow Trout population. Rainbow trout salvaged during periods of maintenance work on flood gates.

326 Rakaia Harper Diversion/River mouth CT Low

330 Ashburton Ashburton River - Lower CS Low Occasional spawning by Chinook Salmon in mainstem. Low flows restrict salmonid passage.

334 Ashburton Ashburton River - North Branch Gorge CS Low Limited spawning gravels available. Headwater fishery. Presence of (including Sw spawning salmon doubtful. River flood prone. Unstable substrate.

338 Ashburton Ashburton River - South Branch CS High Up to 80 Chinook salmon redds recorded. Water abstraction at Valetta.

340 Ashburton Spring Creek CS Medium Most of flow diverted to boarder dyke irrigation in summer. Fish passage to south branch of Ashburton River is restricted when flow is <0.3 m3/s. Lower section choked by willows. High level of annual variability in numbers of

341 Ashburton Taylor's Stream CS Low Most of flow diverted for irrigation in summer. Decline in numbers of spawning salmon and trout. Good juvenile trout habitat.

342 Ashburton Taylors Stream - Gorge CS Low Flood prone.

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

343 Ashburton Bowyers Stream CS High High level of annual variability in numbers of spawning brown trout and Chinook salmon. Important spawning site for Chinook salmon in Ashburton River Catchment. Most salmonid spawning in lower 4km of river. Fish passage to so restricted by low flows.

344 Ashburton Ashburton River South Branch CS Low Dam proposed at Blowing Point. Rangitata Diversion Race Siphon presents a major barrier to upstream salmonid migration requiring fish to make a 1.0 metre jump. Potentially good habitat for searun brown trout and Chinook salmo

347 Ashburton Ashburton River - Upper South Branch CS Low Unstable riverbed. Limited spawning gravels in gorge. No detailed Salmonid surveys.

359 Ashburton Maori Lakes outflow CS High Up to 21 Chinook salmon redds recorded (1999). Valued spawning stream for east Maori lake and south branch of Ashburton River

361 Ashburton Jacobs/Gentleman Smith Streams CS Low Valued spawning stream for east Maori Lake and south branch of Ashburton River

367 Ashburton Olivers Stream CS Low

370 Rakaia Mellish Stream CS Medium Main spawning stream for lake and sea run Chinook salmon.

374 Hinds Hinds River - Lower CS Low High value as a recreational fishery. Lateral drains flowing into mainstem Hinds River of high value to spawning brown trout. High numbers of brown trout smolt.

378 Rangitata Rangitata River - Lower CS Low Chinook salmon lost through downstream passage into Rangitata Diversion Race. Some salmonid spawning in side channels. Regionally significant Chinook salmon fishery.

380 Rangitata Ealing Spring CS Medium Co-managed between iwi and CSI Fish and Game Council. Up to 40 Chinook salmon redds recorded.

383 Rangitata Lynn Stream CS Low Frequently disconnected to Rangitata. Stream flows through a shingle fan.

385 Rangitata Rangitata River - High Country CS Low Chinook Salmon occasionally recorded spawning in the mainstem. Rainbow Trout are only a minor component of the fishery. River protection works at mouth of Deep Creek/Erewhon.

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

386 Rangitata Forest Creek CS Low Chinook Salmon spawned in creek during 1950's - currently unsuitable for salmonids as creek flows into a shingle fan therefore impeding fish passage from the Rangitata River. Creek has potential as a spawning site.

387 Rangitata Deep Stream Complex CS High One of two main spawning sites for Chinook salmon in Rangitata Catchment. Headwater trout fishery. Significant habitat for juvenile salmonids.

388 Rangitata Bush Stream CS Low High level of annual variation in numbers of spawning Chinook salmon. Stream flows through shingle fan. Only intermittently connected to mainstem of Rangitata River.

389 Rangitata Harper Flats Stream CS Medium High level of annual variation in numbers of spawning Chinook salmon.

390 Rangitata Moorhouse Stream CS Low Stream flows through a shingle fan. Only intermittently connected to mainstem of Rangitata River. High potential as a spawning stream.

392 Rangitata Deep Creek Complex CS High One of two main Chinook Salmon spawning sites in Rangitata catchment. Headwater trout fishery. Clyde River periodically floods the spring creek plain.

393 Rangitata Black Birch Creek CS Low Chinook Salmon spawning recorded in 1957. Creek flows into shingle fan and is not connected to the Rangitata River.

394 Rangitata Black Mountain Stream CS Medium

395 Rangitata Alma Stream CS Low Chinook salmon spawning recorded in 1957. Stream flows into shingle fan and is not connected to the Rangitata River.

396 Rangitata Havelock River CS Low Unstable and flood prone river. Unsuitable for salmonids. Chinook salmon spawn but with limited success.

397 Rangitata Growler Stream CS Low

399 Rangitata Caroline Stream CS Medium Fishery habitat is a combination of a spring creek and braided river side channel. 47 Chinook salmon redds (1998) Spring creek vulnerable to being flooded out by Clyde River.

400 Rangitata Clyde River CS Low Unstable and flood prone river. Unsuitable habitat for salmonids.

401 Rangitata CS Low Unstable and flood prone. Unsuitable for salmonids.

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

402 Rangitata Sunday Islands CS Medium

405 Orari Orari River - Lower Section CS High 39% of spawning Chinook salmon recorded 1997 season (-for Orari River system). Gravel extraction. High recreational value.

406 Orari Ohapi Creek CS High 61% of spawning Chinook salmon for Orari River system recorded in 1997. Recreational fishery of high value. Significant disturbance of spawning shingles by dairy cows. Significant instream sediment loads in North branch causi ection of river bank fenced off to prevent livestock disturbance to spawning salmonids.

408 Orari Orari River Gorge CS Low Headwater trout fishery. Presence of Chinook salmon in this section is erratic. Historically important for Chinook salmon.

413 Opihi Temuka Spring Creeks CS Low Important nursery area for brown trout smolts.

414 Opihi Opihi River Lower CS High High value as a recreational fishery. Brown trout salvaged.

415 Opihi Temuka River CS High High value as a recreational brown trout fishery. Poaching of Chinook salmon recorded.

416 Opihi Waihi River CS Medium Dairy cows cause significant damage to brown trout redds Brown trout salvaged.

417 Opihi Hae Hae Te Moana River CS Medium High level of annual variation in numbers of spawning Chinook salmon in lower reaches 58 redds 1997.

419 Opihi Opihi River mid section CS Medium Flow stability resulting from Opuha Dam has resulted in increased spawning in the mainstem by brown trout (M.Webb pers. comm. 1999)

420 Opihi Opuha River - Lower CS Low Flood prone and unstable riverbed. Riverbed modified by dam collapse. Debris scattered throughout riverbed. High sediment load. Extensive river realignment works.

421 Opihi Opuha River Gorge CS Medium Opuha dam limits upstream passage of Chinook salmon and sea-run brown trout to spawning grounds. Opuha dam burst resulted in high sediment loads in stream bed.

423 Opihi Opuha River South Branch CT Low High potential as a spawning stream for salmonids in Lake Opuha. Developing fishery.

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

424 Opihi Opuha River North Branch CT Low High potential as a spawning stream for salmonids in Lake Opuha. Developing fishery.

429 Opihi Opihi River Gorge CS Medium

430 Opihi Opihi River - Upper CS Low Proposal to divert water from Lake Opuha into upper Opihi River. Riverbed unstable and flood prone with long sections of low value to salmonids.

431 Opihi Three Springs - Kimbell CS Medium 4% of Chinook salmon spawning for Opihi River system recorded. Important salmonid spawning stream.

432 Opihi Opihi River - side channel CS Low High potential as a salmonid spawning stream. No surveys of salmonid population. Important site for brown trout smolt.

434 Opihi Dobies Stream CS Low Brown trout and Chinook salmon salvaged. Deer causing damage to brown trout redds and instream siltation.

435 Opihi Tengawai River CS High Habitat values vary according to river flow. Salmonid values highest from Opihi Confluence to 10km upstream. Salmonids frequently salvaged. Low flows impact on salmonid values. River realignment works. Brown trout spawn throu

438 Pareora Pareora River Mouth CS Low

439 Pareora Pareora River - Lower Section CS Low Brown trout population sustained by immigration of searun fish. River frequently dries up. Brown trout salvaged. Poaching of brown trout. River realignment works.

452 Waitaki Waitaki River - Lower CS Low Fluctuating river flows. Negligible amount of mainstem spawning by Chinook salmon. Outstanding fisheries values.

453 Waitaki Waitaki River - mid CS Medium Outstanding significance for salmonid fisheries. Regionally significant lowland population of rainbow trout. Chinook salmon spawn in main stem and side channels. Many Chinook salmon spawning sites are temporary. Salmonid loss tion Scheme.

457 Waitaki Upper Waitaki River CS High Mainstem and side channel spawning for Chinook salmon. High recreational fisheries value for salmonids. Loss of salmonids into irrigation scheme intakes. Fluctuating river levels are a threat to salmonid redds.

Hab_No Catchment Site_Name CSType CSVal Comments

458 Waitaki CS Low Headwater trout fishery. Passage of salmonids into Waitaki River prevented periodically by low flows. Erratic salmonid runs from Waitaki River into Maerewhenua River. Salmonid loss into irrigation raceway intakes. Gorge pools salmonids during periods of low flows.

460 Waitaki Hakataramea River CS High Salmonids salvaged during periods of low flow. Important spawning tributary for salmonids in lower Waitaki River system. Salmon trap on lower section of river - below State Highway 82. Gorge pools provide important refuge for

462 Waitaki Awakino River CS Low Water abstraction restricts upstream passage for salmonids. Potentially of high habitat value to rainbow trout within lower Waitaki River system.

468 Waitaki Deep stream - ST Low Stream mouth into Lake Aviemore frequently blocked by shingle banks. Rainbow trout run ceased due to gravel blocking outflow culvert. Sockeye salmon spawning run in 1979. No sockeye salmon recorded during a survey in 1993. H pawning stream.

487 Waitaki Canal Stream ST Low Current existence of a sockeye salmon population is doubtful.

501 Waitaki Dobson River ST Low Unstable and flood prone river. Most salmonids in lower reaches. Current status of Sockeye salmon population uncertain.

503 Waitaki Larch Stream ST Medium Current existence of a spawning run of sockeye salmon doubtful. Rainbow trout stocked into stream from Lake Middleton

520 Waitaki ST Low High value recreational fishery. Headwater fishery. Variable river flows and sediment loads periodically degrade value of site. Drift dives have recorded 250 adult trout per kilometre. River periodically dries up in upper rea

Appendix 3. Nationally and regionally important salmon spawning sites identified in this review. The upstream extent of some sites is defined by altitude. Significance Downstream coords Catchment Site name Fishery Habitat Overall East North Waiau Henry River local high Local 2472990 5873100 Waiau Waiau River local high Local 2477700 5876200 Waiau Matagouri Point Stream local high Local 2479000 5881100 Hurunui Hurunui North Branch regional medium Local 2441400 5834050 Hurunui Landslip Stream regional high Regional 2431900 5834700 Hurunui Homestead Stream regional high Regional 2444800 5822700 Hurunui Hurunui South Branch regional high Regional 2447450 5821370 Waimakariri Kaiapoi River national high National 2480400 5759260 Waimakariri Winding Creek national high National 2714500 5782300 Waimakariri Poulter River national medium Regional 2417760 5812260 Waimakariri Poulter Spring Creek 1 national high National 2418580 5809900 Waimakariri Poulter Spring Creek 2 national high National 2418070 5812150 Waimakariri Poulter Spring Creek 3 national high National 2418070 5812150 Waimakariri Thompson Stream national low Local 2415900 5816700 Waimakariri Cass Hill Stream national high National 2416800 5792500 Waimakariri One Tree Swamp national high National 2406800 5799900 Waimakariri Cora-Lynn Stream national high National 2404000 5797500 Rakaia Glenariffe Stream national high National 2378150 5765070 Rakaia Double Hill Stream national high National 2377600 5765800 Rakaia Manuka Point Stream national high National 2367900 5768000 Rakaia Hydra Waters national high National 2377100 5768400 Rakaia Montrose Creek national high National 2397580 5746280 Rakaia Ryton River regional high Regional 2390500 5767800 Rakaia Goat Hill national medium Regional 2378700 5774200 Rakaia Hennah Stream regional high Regional 2391800 5769300 Rakaia Mellish Stream local high Local 2365600 5747000 Ashburton Ashburton River S Branch local high Local 2407500 5701600 Ashburton Bowyers Stream local high Local 2389900 5720300 Ashburton Maori Lakes outflow local high Local 2362600 5733000 Rangitata Deep Stream (Mesopotamia) national high National 2346400 5724100 Rangitata Deep Creek (Mt Potts) national high National 2341400 5733900 Rangitata Brabazon Fan national medium Regional 2341200 5731200 Rangitata Black Mountain Stream national medium Regional 2334800 5737900 Rangitata Ealing Springs national low Local 2382400 5683100 Rangitata McKinnons Creek national high National 2389300 5670200 Orari Orari River local high Local 2382800 5661700 Orari Ohapi Creek local high Local 2382400 5661600 Opihi Opihi River regional high Regional 2375300 5659080 Opihi Temuka River regional high Regional 2375200 5659300 Opihi Waihi River regional high Regional 2371400 5663400 Opihi Opuha River gorge regional medium Local 2348200 5678900 Opihi Tengawai River regional high Regional 2361000 5660600 Waitaki Waitaki River (Waitaki Dam–SH1) national high National 2359930 5584825 Waitaki Hakataramea River national high National 2310720 5605510 Waitaki Larch Stream local high Local 2258100 5670000 Waitaki Stockyard Creek local high Local 2259800 5675140 Waitaki Ohau tributary 1 local high Local 2286290 5647710 Waitaki Ohau tributary 2 local high Local 2280540 5652770

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region

Appendix 3 (continued). Nationally and regionally important salmon spawning sites identified in this review. Upstream cords Upstream East North altitude Downstream Location Upstream Location 2468800 5873200 St James walkway bridge Approx 2 km above Anne River 2482000 5889800 Ada River confluence Approx 2.5km above river gauge 2479000 5883600 790 Waiau confluence 790 m contour 2425710 5833130 Lake Sumner Camp Stream confluence 2429310 5834460 620 Hurunui confluence 620 m contour 2441500 5824700 700 Hurunui confluence 700 m contour 2429410 5827480 780 North Esk confluence Stream at 780 m contour 2475770 5754430 Upper tidal limit (approx) South Eyre Road 2411300 5786600 Former hut site Lake Pearson outflow 2415880 5816690 Casey Stream Thompson Stream 2417790 5811600 600 Poulter confluence Approx 600 m contour 600 Poulter confluence Approx 600 m contour 600 Poulter confluence Approx 600 m contour 2417640 5819130 Poulter confluence Top of first braided section 2413200 5796600 Waimakariri confluence Poorly defined 540 Waimakariri confluence 540 m contour 580 Waimakariri confluence 580 m contour 2372830 5766000 Rakaia confluence Pond on south side of Double Hill 450 Rakaia confluence 450 m contour 540 Rakaia confluence 540 m contour 480 Rakaia confluence 480 m contour 2397000 5746980 Rakaia confluence ~300 m contour 2393170 5770100 Lake Coleridge Mount Hennah 500 Wilberforce River 500 m contour 2391300 5771300 Ryton confluence Lake Evelyn outlet 2366480 5746020 Lake Heron 4WD track ~1.5 km upstream 2392100 5717700 North Branch confluence Bowyers Stream confluence 2384100 5727600 280 m contour Mill Creek confluence 2363000 5735200 Ashburton confluence Maori Lakes outlet 470 Rangitata confluence 470 m contour 530 Rangitata confluence 530 m contour 500 Rangitata confluence 500 m contour 580 Rangitata confluence 580 m contour 2380440 5684860 Rangitata confluence 140 m contour 40 Rangitata confluence 40 m contour 2377690 5667910 Orari River mouth. Orari River at Badham Bridge 2376230 5664450 20 Orari confluence Guild Road / 20 m contour 2336590 5676760 Temuka River confluence Fairlie (SH 79 bridge) 2371400 5663400 Opihi confluence Ford at Oxford Crossing Road 2371330 5670940 Oxford Crossing Road Beeby Road ford 2341200 5685800 Skipton Bridge Approximately 1.5 km below dam 2340600 5662200 Opihi confluence Albury 2306060 5610005 SH1 Waitaki Dam. 2325540 5630640 Waitaki confluence Cattle Creek 540 Hopkins confluence 540 m contour 555 Hopkins confluence Just below 560 m contour 2285530 5648560 Ponds beside Ohau C 2278250 5654180 Ohau confluence Below power lines

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region

Assessment of significant salmon spawning sites in the Canterbury region