B
Adam Sherry March 31, 2015 Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Contents Acknowledgements ...... 3 Executive Summary ...... 4 Project Staff...... 5 Introduction ...... 6 Methodology ...... 8 Prioritizing ...... 8 Field Assessments ...... 9 Results ...... 11 Community Outreach ...... 14 Appendix A: Maps ...... 16
Page 2
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Acknowledgements The Migration Barrier Assessment Project would not have been possible without the financial contributions of the Habitat Stewardship Program and NSLC Adopt-A-Stream.
Thank you to the staff at NSLC Adopt-A-Stream for their training and support throughout the project.
Thank you to Sean Corrigan with Department of Fisheries and Oceans for sharing his knowledge in the field of culvert assessment.
Page 3
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Executive Summary Barriers to migration are a significant threat to Inner Bay of Fundy Atlantic salmon populations. They prevent access to potential habitat, feeding areas and spawning locations. The intersection of roads and watercourses are a common area for barriers to occur in the form of a culvert. The Shubenacadie / Stewiacke Watershed contains over 2000 intersections between roads and watercourses and in this field season the MCG crew visited 240 of these potential barriers and performed complete assessments on 150 culverts.
Culverts were rated as non-barriers (completely passable), partial barriers or complete barriers based on the guidelines created by the British Columbia Ministry of Environment (2008). The targets species for this project was Inner Bay of Fundy Atlantic salmon with lengths of 15 cm or greater.
In addition to culvert assessments MCG performed 10 remediations on culverts that were barriers due to debris build up (garbage or natural). A database of barriers has been completed to be considered for future remediation work.
Page 4
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Project Staff Angeline Gillis, Mi’kmaw Conservation Group Senior Director Adam Sherry, Mi’kmaw Conservation Group GIS Technician, Project Lead Heather Mills, Mi’kmaw Conservation Group Summer Student, Student Lead Amber MacLean-Hawes, Mi’kmaw Conservation Group Summer Student Christian Francis, Mi’kmaw Conservation Group Summer Student Matt Lees, Mi’kmaw Conservation Group Water Engineer Anthony King, Mi’kmaw Conservation Group Research and Education Assistant Alyx MacDonald, Mi’kmaw Conservation Group Research and Education Assistant
Page 5
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Introduction The Mi’kmaw Conservation Group (MCG) is a program that is administered by the Confederacy of Mainland Mi’kmaq (CMM). MCG is made up of a team of staff, advisory committee members and volunteers who are all passionate about our mission to promote and protect the concept and practice of Netukulimk in the Bay of Fundy Watershed. MCG’s mission statement is to “ promote and restore the concept of Netukulimk in the Bay of Fundy Watershed”. Netukulimk is the Mi’kmaq concept of sustaining oneself from the bounty of mother earth while preserving it for future generations.
The MCG is guided by Communities that have an interest in the Bay of Fundy Watershed through their participation on the MCG Advisory Committee. The MCG Communities have an interest in the protection and restoration in the Bay of Fundy Watershed. The MCG Advisory Committee’s role is to bring forward their knowledge and expertise and also the pressing issues of their Communities concerning conservation. The Advisory Committee members are appointed by Chief and Council of the individual Communities. Currently, these Communities include: Annapolis Valley First Nation, Fort Folly First Nation (New Brunswick), Glooscap First nation, Sipekne’katik Band (Indian Brook), Millbrook First Nation and Pictou Landing First Nation (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Map showing the locations of MCG member communities.
Page 6
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Culverts are manmade structures used to allow the passage of watercourses beneath roads or railways. Culverts come in a variety of shapes, sizes and material but they are all built to serve the same function. It is sometimes overlooked that in addition to allowing the passage of a watercourse under a manmade road, however culverts also need to be a passage for aquatic organisms such as fish. Through improper installation, deterioration or other environmental factors culverts can become barriers to fish migration. A culvert that acts as a barrier to fish migration can restrict fish access to upstream habitat, food sources and spawning conditions.
The Stewiacke watershed has over 2500 water crossings that have the potential to be barriers to fish migration. MCG received funding from Habitat Stewardship Program for the assessment of 75 culverts. The organization had also applied for and received funding for an additional 75 culverts to be assessed in the areas surrounding our member communities.
The goal of this field season is the assessment of 150 potential barriers and the remediation of 5 of these problematic culverts.
Page 7
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Methodology
Prioritizing Prior to the field season it was required to identify the locations of potential barriers within the Stewiacke Watershed (Figure 2). The GIS Technician used ArcGIS to calculate the intersections between roads and watercourses within the project area using 1:10,000 scale base layers acquired from GeoNOVA Portal. The result was over 2000 potential sites to visit. Priority for site visits was given to potential crossings on rivers feeding directly into the Stewiacke River as these rivers have the potential of containing the first barriers that a fish would meet during migration from the Stewiacke. Priority was also given to rivers that had identified the presence of Inner Bay of Fundy Atlantic salmon during an electrofishing project completed by MCG staff with DFO, combined with traditional knowledge of our community members. Ease of access was also taken into consideration, to ensure that the goal of 150 culvert assessments was met.
Figure 2: Calculated intersections between roads and watercourses in the Shubenacadie /Stewiacke Watershed.
Page 8
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Field Assessments The MCG field crew was trained in “The Guide to Surveying Culverts for Fish Passage” by NSLC Adopt-A- Stream on June 26, 2014. The training involved an office presentation followed by visiting a culvert nearby and performing an assessment under supervision. This was a full day of training that was attended by five MCG staff members (three full time staff and two summer student positions). Adopt-A- Stream provided the data sheets for the field season and also accompanied the field crew to observe the data collection process for one field day.
At least 2 MCG staff members were required for field visits for both safety and logistics of data capture. Additional field crew facilitated faster capturing of data, as two workers could be in the stream taking measurements while a third member remained on the bank to record data and observe the survey elevations.
The field crew was equipped with the following list of supplies for the culvert assessment process:
• Field Maps • MobileMapper 20 GPS Unit • Survey Level and Tripod • Survey Rod • Meter Stick • Measuring Tape • Tasco VLRF600 Laser Range Finder • Digital Camera • Chest Waders • Rubber Boots • Field Desk and Waterproof data sheets • YSI Water Quality Logger • Field First Aid Kit • Reflective Safety Vests • Orange Traffic Road Cones
In the field, the first step in assessment is to determine whether or not the site qualified as fish habitat. Every culvert with water present at either the inflow or outflow was classified as fish habitat. Non fish habitat status was applied to site that were dry for significant lengths up and downstream from the culvert. These sites can be revisited during a different season to check their quality, as they may only be dry during the summer months in which they were initially visit.
If the culvert was on a watercourse that is deemed to be fish habitat the field crew would assign a site ID then record site information such as its spatial location, the name of the road and watercourse intersecting and take note of any debris present or fish observed. The crew would take at least four photographs: one looking towards the culvert from upstream, one looking toward the culvert from downstream, one looking through the culvert from the inflow and one looking through the culvert from the outflow. Additional photos would be recorded as required (for noting damage or remediation efforts etc.).
Page 9
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
The crew would then record the style of culvert (circular, box etc.), the entrance type of the culvert (projected, headwall, mitered, etc.) and the culvert material (steel, wood, plastic, etc.).
The crew would record the culvert’s dimensions, make note of the current water levels as well as the mark left by highest water levels. Stream measurements would be recorded next, measuring the width of the upstream riffle, run and pool where applicable as well as the length, width and depth of the plunge pool at the culvert’s outflow Using survey equipment, elevations would be taken at 6 points along the stream: first upstream riffle, inflow, outflow, plunge pool bottom, first and second downstream riffles (Figure 2), allowing for the calculation of outflow drop and culvert slope, two of our parameters for designating a culvert as a complete, partial or non-barrier (Table 1). The distances between each of these elevations is also measured. Additional information such as the type of inflow (pool, run, riffle or drop), percentage of backwatered, beaver activity and fish presence is also recorded. Crew would also note the percentage of sediment size, embedment and water quality. Finally, additional notes would be taken describing the culvert and surrounding environment.
Figure 2: Locations of the elevations recorded as part of each culvert assessment. Taken from NSLC Adopt-A-Stream’s “Guide to Surveying Culverts for Fish Passage”
Page 10
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Results Barrier status was applied to culverts that fit into certain parameters (Table 1) or had a significant buildup of debris, restricting fish passage.
Barrier Type Criteria Non -Barrier Both of the following criteria must be met: • Outflow drop < 15 cm • Culvert slope <0.5% Partial Barrier At least one of the following criteria must be met: • Outflow drop between 15 – 20 cm • Culvert slope between 0.5% - 2.5% Complete Barrier At le ast one of the following criteria must be met: • Outflow drop > 30 cm • Culvert slop > 2.5% Table 1: Criteria for migration barrier classification
The field season began in the first week of July, 2014. This was later than anticipated but was required for the staff to be trained in the assessment technique. The summer students completed their contracts on August 29, 2014 however MCG staff continued with assessments until December, 2014 to meet the 150 complete assessments (Table 2). These numbers indicate that 43% of assessed culverts would be classified as some sort of barrier. This is a significant obstacle for Atlantic salmon migration in the steams at the assessed culvert.
Type of Barrier Number Non -Barriers 85 Partial Barriers 32 Complete Ba rriers 33 Table 2: Number count of each barrier type classification.
In addition to the 150 assessments, 10 remediations were performed by clearing out debris, garbage or beaver dams that were creating barriers to fish passage. The removal of these barriers opened up approximately 10,360 m of potential habitat. More advanced remediation techniques would be required for many of the barrier culverts assessed in the field season. These could include the buildup or rock weirs to increase depth of the plunge pool, modifying tailwater control, baffle installation or complete replacement of significantly damaged or incorrectly installed culverts.
The first remediation occurred with the aid of Department of Fisheries and Oceans and required the use of a backhoe. This remediation took place at culvert SMB001 near Pictou Landing (Figure 3). We performed multiple other remediations during the course of the field season (Figure 4, Figure 5, Figure 6
Page 11
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015 and Figure 7), each performed by manually removing debris from either the inflow or outflow. Debris removed was either natural (beaver dams or branch and sediment build up) or unnatural (garabge).
Figure 3 : Beaver Dam at culvert SMB001. This was removed with a backhoe by Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Figure 4: Removal of a barrier in the form of a Beaver Dam at culvert COL001.
Page 12
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Figure 5: Debris removal remediation at RIN002.
Figure 6: Debris removal remediation at culvert assessment RUT002.
Figure 7: Debris removal remediation at culvert assessment COL005.
Page 13
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Community Outreach One of the goals of this project was to introduce youth in our member communities (Table 3) to the concept of migration barriers and the effects they have on salmon. We gave a presentation on the techniques used in assessing culverts, as well as how remediations could alleviate some of the issues that may occur at a barrier culvert. We then took the group to a nearby culvert and performed a full assessment. This gave the audience a chance to see the aforementioned techniques in action and also allow them to be hands on during the assessment. (Figure 8).
Location Date Attendees
Annapolis Valley July 8, 2014 15 Millbrook July 15, 2014 15 Glooscap August 13, 2014 16 Pictou Landing August 12, 2014 2
Table 3: List of attendees present at our culvert assessment presentations
Figure 8: Children from Glooscap First Nation getting hands on with the culvert assessment process.
Page 14
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
In an effort to make our community members aware of the assessments being performed in their areas, we posted 3 articles in the MCG Newsletter. One of these articles was written for a younger target audience and was featured in MCG’s Children’s Newsletter. The project was also the subject of multiple postings through MCG’s Facebook page.
The results of the assessments are presented in a web game featured on the MCG Website titled Go Plamu, Go . The game allows users to click on any of the 150 culverts assess by field staff, and an animation will occur presenting the culvert as either a non-barrier, partial barrier or complete barrier. The game also allows the user to enter their own values for outflow drop and culvert slope to receive a barrier rating for culverts not assessed by MCG. This encourages the users to collect their own information on culverts in their area. (Figure 4)
Figure 5: Go, Plamu, Go as featured on the MCG Website.
Page 15
Assessment of Potential Migration Barriers to Endangered Atlantic Salmon in the Stewiacke Watershed March 1, 2015
Appendix A: Maps
Page 16
! !
P k e k o m oo o r r b B BRB001 r r B e P ! o k k l MCB007 n c e e u ! a S k¯ a MCB006 o R ro s ! ! m ok B a UNK015 LEG002 o i MCB004 p r v s n ! B s ! a ck e ra t R a h J r G B u b C OTB008 ru r t c o h ! S o e ok k k r o f OTB005 r o o B o ! y r r CHA004 ! le k d o B ! nt e o y B r d ! B B n r o s ra OTB003 a P B o CHA003 ! il k l a e ! h a ! ! ! a s ! ! M a !! OTB012 OTB002 n LIT005 CHA002 !!! ! t LIT004! ALT001 ! ! CHA001 ! OTB010 ok B ! x Bro D OTB001 Co r k o o u ! !PEM003 o n o r ! ! RUT001 l ! k B o PEM002 er k p o L d FIE001 B ! ! l o i ! A r r t o t l B o e r k ! WAT003 ! BEA003 ! R ! a STT003 ! PEM001 e i v ! B HAL001 e BEA002 WAT001 ! ! STT002 k ! k r ! ! o oo BEA001 ! o r r y B k ! B le l ! o u r G o WAT005 ! e DUB001 r ! PUT001 t ! STT032 BEA00!4 t ! B ! STT033 ! ! O s STT031 ! d
l
e ! LIT001 i ! ! F WAT004 ! M STT025 ! ! STT026 ! i MIL002 l ! L ! ! l STT027 ! STT019 e STT024 ! i r t MIL001 STT028 t l B e ! ! ! r R o STT029 i ! o v k N e STT015 (2) e r Fisher Brook l ! s o n !STT014 ! B
k r E o o ast o G o Br k o r ! ook NEL002 sh B ! e STT015 ! BRE001 n d B r ! ro u ! ! ok H EAS001 STT009 ! e ! ! EAS004 ! l t WAT007 ! ! FIN001 t W JOH001 ! ! i ! EAS002 ! a L ! t EAS003 STT008 e ! BRE003 SOU002 ! r ! i UNK028 UNK021 ! n ! g UNK027 F M i B c n r C d o u la o ll y k o B ug h ro k BRE002 B o o ! r k o o r o B k k er e o iv o R k r s a w B k re L nd s o A s n o t. i r S v e ll B a i D k M c o l r e h S
! Bridges Roads ! 0 1 2 3 4 5 Kilometers Migration Barrier Assessment Complete Barriers NS Highways Project Results ! Non Barriers Rivers Scale: 1:100,000 Stewiacke Watershed ! Partial Barriers Not Fish Habitat !
!
!
! !
! ! ¯
LEB004 ! CBT004 ! ! CBT003 UNK008 ! ! UNK010
MCB002 ! ! LEB002 UNK012 ! !! MCB001 ! UNK011 FRB002
! LEB001 ! LEB003
2
0 2
1 y
a
y
a w
h
w
g h i
g
i H
H
! BRB001 MCB007 MCB006 MCB004 ! ! !
!UNK015 !
! Bridges NS Highways Migration Barrier Assessment ! ! Non Barriers Roads 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Kilometers Project Results ! Millbrook First Nation Partial Barriers Rivers ! Scale: 1:50,000 ! Complete Barriers Extent of Community Not Fish Habitat
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
! !
!
!
! ! !
! !
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
! ! ! !
! ! !
!! !
!
!
!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
! !
!
!
! ! !
! !
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
G
e o
r ¯ g e f i e l UNK019 d d ! a o 5 R R ss 1 ro 2 o C a lem y d Sa N a o w
r h t h g In i d I ian ! n S H d a R i A o a l a e n d n m d B e TRA001 ! r R r ! o s ! o UNK018 o o ! TRA002 k a n d
d
R a
o o !UNK017 Etter Road
a R R
d i s i IND001 n th e o ! l u Trac s o B ey B rook B ! UNK016 S ! r 2 ! o 0 ! o 1 UNK020 k TRA003 y a ! w h d ! ig oa H ll R che ! Mit RIN001 Mill M ! Village e Road ad ow
D d riv a e o
R
Road e b H Robinson !
i
m g
RIN002 o h
SPR001 r w 2
! C ! ! a y ! y a
1 w h 0 g 2 i
N H
d o oa r R t h ert es 224 y D way nd igh Sa H
! Bridges NS Highways Migration Barrier Assessment ! Project Results Non Barriers Roads Indian Brook First Nation ! Partial Barriers Rivers 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Kilometers ! Complete_Barriers MCG Community Member
Not Fish Habitat
!! UNK004 ! Sh ad ¯ y La FIP001 ne ! UNK025 !
! d a
o
R SCH001 r n ! u w o o S b n c ur r rbo k h Ha a Boat n o H o U l e B c
n r o a o h P k ! ic C to u L ! a n P d ic in to g u R o L a a d nd in d g a d AND003 R o a ! o R o a t d R !UNK023 p y l g l E e ok ! o w son Br Ander ! ! o UNK024 P AND002 ! UNK022
d a o R
r tor u ec o nn b SMB002 Co r ton a ! n H re T e l t t oad i Smal R L G ls B gan lenfa rook Lo lloch Roa ! d SMB001
! Bridges NS Highways Migration Barrier Assessment ! Complete Barriers Roads 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Kilometers Project Results ! Pictou Landing First Nation Non Barriers Rivers Scale: 1:50,000 ! Partial Barriers Extent of Community Not Fish Habitat
!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
! !
!
!
! ! !
! !
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
! ! ! !
! ! !
!! !
!
!
!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
! !
!
!
! ! !
! !
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
B
l i ¯ g h
R ok o ro a B d ne wi dy an ! Br Hi ghw G a r y N 22 e ! 1 o e r n t h R
B o
i a s
h d COL004-2 COT006 o ! ! p
! R COL005 o a COT005 d ! COT003 ! ! COT002 ! COT004 ! ! COT001 ! ! COL006 C COL004-1 ! ! o COT003 ! U l e n ! COL002 m k
n ! a
o n k o COL001 w o R r n o B a n
d a m oad le ord R o atchf C R 1 ay 10 Highw Cornwa llis River ! ! !
1 Highway
! Bridges NS Highways Migration Barrier Assessment ! Complete Barriers Roads 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Kilometers Project Results ! Annapolis Valley First Nation Non Barriers Rivers Scale: 1:50,000 ! Partial Barriers Extent of Community Not Fish Habitat
!! !
!
!
!
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!
! !
!
!
! ! !
! !
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
! ¯ ! ! !
! ! KEL004! !
K
e
l l y
B
r H o i o g
k h w H a ig y KEL003 h KET002 ! w 1 ! ay 1 0 1 KET001 B ! e ! c KEB001 k w
i t h KEB002
B ! r o o Di k xon Br ook BEC001 ! DIX001 ! !!
! Bridges NS Highways Migration Barrier Assessment ! ! Complete Barriers Roads 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Kilometers Project Results ! Glooscap First Nation Non Barriers Rivers Scale: 1:50,000 ! Partial Barriers Extent of Community Not Fish Habitat