Lake Revelstoke Reservoir Creel and Visitor Use Survey 2000
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Lake Revelstoke Reservoir Creel and Visitor Use Survey 2000 by: K. Bray and M. Campbell Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program Revelstoke, B.C. January 2001 Executive Summary From May 5 to September 4, 2000, an access point creel survey was conducted on Lake Revelstoke. The principal objectives were to assess the sport fishery on Lake Revelstoke, collect biological data on fish species in the reservoir, and provide a baseline against which future change can be measured. A visitor use survey was conducted concurrently with the creel survey to gauge visitor opinions and perceptions about Lake Revelstoke and to determine how people were using the reservoir. The number of partners involved in this project presents a good example of both the challenges of managing a complex project and the success when many parties work together. Random sampling was stratified by day type (weekend/holidays and weekdays), site location, and time of day. Seven major access point sites were identified and assigned selection probabilities based on previous surveys and current conditions. Aerial survey counts of boats and campers and ground counts of campers were conducted at informal sites to help estimate the proportion of effort missed. 536 angler interviews were conducted with anglers from B.C. comprising 91.6% of those surveyed and Albertans 6.9%. Residents of Revelstoke accounted for half (50.2%) of the interviews and Okanagan anglers for 30.4%. The average trip length was 2.81 ± 0.16 hours with an average of 2.29 anglers and 2.13 rods per boat. Most fishing on Lake Revelstoke was done from a boat (96%) with lures used during almost all recorded fishing trips. Most fishing effort was directed towards kokanee (1354 hours or 90%). Average catch (all species) was 0.82 fish/angler, and the mean hourly catch per unit effort (CPUE) was 0.292 ± 0.048 fish/hour. Kokanee was the most frequently caught species, contributing 92.5% of the total catch, almost all of which were kept. The average catch was 0.76 kokanee/angler, the mean CPUE 0.270 ± 0.06 kokanee/hour. CPUE’s for other species caught were 0.012 ± 0.001 bull trout/hour, 0.007± 0.0004 rainbow trout/hour, and 0.003± 0.000 mountain whitefish/hour. Total directed effort towards kokanee was estimated at 23 720 ± 6 212 angling hours with an estimated 7 023 ± 3 593 kokanee caught. An additional 25-30% of fishing effort is estimated to occur from the many informal camping and access points along the reservoir. Lake Revelstoke is a particularly difficult waterbody to survey effectively with limited funds. Large standard errors on total effort and catch estimates are due to great variability in the data and are mostly due to the sheer size of the reservoir and number of access points. The sport fish catch on Lake Revelstoke appears to have undergone little change since 1992 although catches of rainbow trout have declined. Local anglers from Revelstoke continue to make up about one half of the total angling population and the proportion of seniors fishing has increased. Fishing effort continues to be predominantly focused on kokanee. Ninety-one visitor interviews were conducted in conjunction with the creel survey. Results indicate that most reservoir users are Revelstoke residents, followed closely by visitors from the Okanagan. In general people are quite happy with the range and upkeep of facilities along the reservoir and value the easy access and scenery. The strongest wishes expressed by those interviewed were to have the old Downie Park site opened as an informal site and to have a greater enforcement presence to ensure fishing regulations are followed. i Acknowledgments We would like to thank all the anglers and visitors who kindly took the time to participate in these surveys. This project would not have been possible without help from the following people and organisations: Sam Olynyk and the Revelstoke Rotary Club Jon Wilsgaard (MOF Golden) and Ministry of Forests Revelstoke Office Tom Tischik, Revelstoke Chamber of Commerce Debbie Wozniak, Enterprise Centre University of Victoria Biology Co-op Program Rachel Manson Heather Davis Funding was provided by the Columbia Basin Trust Local Government Initiatives Program, BC Hydro Lake Revelstoke Recreation Fund, and Human Resources and Development Canada. ii Table of Contents Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………… i Acknowledgments ……………………………………………………………………………. ii Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………………………. iii List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………………... iv List of Tables ……………………………………………………………………………….... iv Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………. 1 Study Area ……………………………………………………………………………………. 1 PART I – Creel Survey Methods ……………………………………………………………………………………… 1 Survey Sites …………………………………………………………………………... 2 Angler Interviews …………………………………………………………………….. 2 Data Analysis ………………………………………………………………………… 2 Limitations and Biases ………………………………………………………………... 2 Administration ……………………………………………………………………….. 4 Results ………………………………………………………………………………………... 4 Angler Characteristics ………………………………………………………………… 4 Trip Characteristics ………………………………………………………………….... 5 Fishing Effort During Other Months ………………………………………………... 5 Directed Effort ……………………………………………………………………….. 7 Angler Success ………………………………………………………………………... 7 Estimation of Total Catch and Directed Effort for Kokanee …………………………. 9 Biological Data ……………………………………………………………………… 10 Comparisons with previous surveys …………………………………………………. 11 Discussion …………………………………………………………………………………... 13 PART II – Visitor Use Survey Results ………………………………………………………………………………………. 15 Summary of Results ………………………………………………………………………... 26 Literature Cited ……………………………………………………………………………... 27 iii Appendices Appendix I – Creel Survey Sampling Schedule and Site/Shift Probabilities Appendix II – Creel and Visitor Use Survey Forms Appendix III – Effort Data Appendix IV – Fish Data List of Figures Figure 1. Map of Lake Revelstoke reservoir with creel survey and informal use site locations ... 3 Figure 2. Residence of anglers ………………………………………………………………... 6 Figure 3. Fork length frequency of kokanee measured during the 2000 creel survey ……….... 11 Figure 4. Residence of visitors interviewed ………………………………………………… 15 Figure 5. Primary and secondary activities of visitors to Lake Revelstoke ………………….. 16 Figure 6. Proportion of expenditures on various items made in Revelstoke ……………… ... 17 Figure 7. Average number of visits made to Lake Revelstoke in a year …………………….. 17 Figure 8. Proportion of use by season ……………………………………………………... 18 Figure 9. Type of sites used by visitors to Lake Revelstoke ……………………………..…... 19 Figure 10. Site preference indicated ……………………………………………………….. 19 Figure 11. Reasons given why different site types are preferred ……………………………. 21 List of Tables Table 1. Age composition of anglers …………………………………………………………. 5 Table 2. Expected fishing effort for other months on Lake Revelstoke as indicated during angler interviews …………………………………………………………………………………….. 5 Table 3. Directed fishing effort by species ……………………………………………………. 7 Table 4. Summary of catch, catch per angler, and mean CPUE for all angler interviews ……... 8 Table 5. Summary of catch, catch per angler, and CPUE for 5 May-30 Jun and 1 Jul -4 Sept for kokanee and all species ……………………………………………………………………….. 8 iv Table 6. Angler success on Lake Revelstoke …………………………………………………. 9 Table 7. Estimation of total catch and total directed effort for kokanee …………………….. 10 Table 8. Summary of comparative data from the 1992, 1993, and 2000 creel surveys ………. 12 v Introduction In the summer of 2000 an access point creel survey was conducted on Lake Revelstoke. The principal objectives of the study were to assess the sport fishery on Lake Revelstoke, collect biological data on fish species in the reservoir, and provide a baseline against which future change can be measured. Trends may indicate underlying changes in the relative abundance of sport fish species in Lake Revelstoke and provide an indication of overall reservoir productivity. The last creel surveys conducted on Lake Revelstoke took place in 1992 and 1993 and were directed at assessing the relative numbers of marked versus wild rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in the sport fishery (R.L.&L. 1993; Gazey 1994). A voluntary creel card survey was also conducted in 1986 (Fleming and Smith 1988) shortly after creation of the reservoir. In the last few years it is believed that recreational use and sport fishing has increased with more visitors and anglers coming from beyond the local area. There have also been some concerns raised by local residents about the condition of informal use sites along the reservoir with respect to garbage and human waste. A visitor use survey was conducted concurrently with the creel survey to gauge visitor opinions and perceptions about Lake Revelstoke and to determine how people were using the reservoir. The questionnaire was administered to interested visitors by the creel clerk when not conducting angler interviews. Study Area Lake Revelstoke is located on the Columbia River about 3 km north of the City of Revelstoke (Figure 1). Formed in 1984 with the completion of the Revelstoke Dam, Lake Revelstoke stretches 128 km upstream to Mica Dam, averaging 0.9 km in width. The reservoir has a mean depth of 46 m and a surface area of 10 125 ha. As a run-of-the-river reservoir, Lake Revelstoke is subject to an annual drawdown of approximately 1.5 m with daily fluctuations in the order of 0.15 m. Lake Revelstoke is easily accessible by paved road (Hwy 23 North) and is a popular recreation