Environmental Assessment Application Proposed Knob Hill Wind Farm

APPENDIX 24:

FINAL REPORT ON FISH AND FISH

HABITAT BY SHAWN HAMILTON

January 25, 2004 Sea Breeze Energy Inc. Appendix 24

Environmental Assessment Application Proposed Knob Hill Wind Farm

CONTENTS:

Final Report On Fish Habitat

Plate 1 Knob Hill Wind Farm Stream Reaches and Codes

January 25, 2004 Sea Breeze Energy Inc. Appendix 24

Fish and Fish Habitat Impact Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project

Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project

Vancouver Island

Prepared By:

Shawn Hamilton and Associates

January, 2004

Fish and Fish Habitat Impact Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project

Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project

Vancouver Island

January, 2004

Prepared for:

Sea Breeze Energy Inc. Box 91 Suite 1400 – 601 W Hastings Street Vancouver, B.C. V6B 5A6

Prepared by:

Shawn Hamilton, R. P. Bio. and Associates 430 Odyssey Lane Victoria, B.C. V9E 2J2

Fish and Fish Habitat Impact Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project

Acknowledgments

This report was prepared for Sea Breeze Energy Inc. Thanks are due to Resja Campfens and James Griffiths of Sea Breeze for their ongoing support. Harold Waldock, Sea Breeze, reviewed the draft report and provided many helpful suggestions.

Thanks to Mike Wise, P. Eng. of GeoWise Engineering Ltd. and Terrance Lewis, Ph.D., P. Ag., P.Geo. for their assistance during field assessments of stream crossings and many helpful comments and suggests during report preparation.

Special thanks to Dave Carter and Derek Chung, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, for taking time in their busy schedules to attend several site reviews. Thanks also to George Reid, Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, for his comments.

The fish sampling was conducted by Alisa Mehmal, fisheries technician with Fishfor Contracting, and Shawn Hamilton.

Fish and Fish Habitat Impact Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction...... 1 1.1. Assessment Methodology ...... 3 1.1.1. Pre-Field Assessment...... 3 1.1.2. Fish and Habitat Sampling...... 4 1.1.3. Non fish-bearing Reports...... 6 1.1.4. Cumulative Effects ...... 6 1.2. Knob Hill Wind Farm Area ...... 7 1.3. Access Roads ...... 8 1.4. Transmission Line...... 8

2. Existing Fisheries Information...... 10 2.1. Limitations of Existing Fisheries Data ...... 10 2.2. RISC Mapping ...... 11 2.3. Knob Hill Wind Farm Area ...... 11 2.4. Access Road...... 12 2.4.1. Existing Fisheries Information for Branch NE 62 ...... 13 2.4.2. Existing Fisheries Information for Branch NE 62D ...... 13 2.5. Transmission Line...... 13 2.6. Rare and Endangered Fish Species...... 14

3. Results of Field Assessments...... 15 3.1. Knob Hill Wind Farm Area ...... 15 3.1.1. Cumulative Effects Related to the Knob Hill Service Roads ...... 22 3.2. Knob Hill Access Road...... 24 3.2.1. Fisheries Assessment of Route Options...... 24 3.3. Access Road NE 62D ...... 26 3.4. Transmission Line...... 33 3.5. Cumulative Effects of the Access Road and the Transmission Line ...... 35 3.6. Additional Facilities...... 35

4. Fisheries Act Approval ...... 37

Fish and Fish Habitat Impact Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project

4.1. Magnitude of Unavoidable Habitat Loss ...... 37 4.2. Application of DFO Habitat Policies and Guidelines...... 37

5. General Mitigation and Compensation Strategies ...... 39 5.1. Instream Fisheries Timing Windows ...... 40 5.2. Non fish-bearing Stream Reaches...... 41 5.3. Fish Bearing Reaches with no HADD ...... 42 5.4. Fish Bearing Reaches Where a HADD Cannot be Avoided...... 43

6. Mitigation Strategies Related to Each of the Three Project Components...... 44 6.1. Knob Hill Service Roads ...... 44 6.2. Knob Hill Access Road...... 46 6.3. Transmission Line Development ...... 48

7. Monitoring ...... 50 7.1. Construction Monitoring...... 50 7.2. Post-Construction Effectiveness Monitoring...... 50 7.3. Monitoring of Suspended Sediment...... 51

8. References...... 52

9. Appendix 1. RISC Site Card Reports

10. Appendix 2. Fisheries Assessment of Potential Knob Hill Road Access - Branch N.E. 62 and N.E. 62D: April 10 to 11, 2003

11. Appendix 3. Summary of Fish Habitat and Riparian Vegetation for the Knob Hill Service Road Crossings - 2003

12. Appendix 4. Summary of Fish Sampling Results for Knob Hill Access Road - October 29 to 30, 2003

Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

1. INTRODUCTION

Sea Breeze Energy Incorporated (“Sea Breeze”) is proposing to construct a wind farm on Knob Hill located on the northern end of Vancouver Island. Although several potential wind farm sites will be assessed during the next few years, the Knob Hill area is the first to be investigated.

The Knob Hill Wind Farm Project is comprised of the following three major components:

1) The Knob Hill Wind Farm Area which includes the turbine towers, tower service roads, and substation; 2) The access road from the Holberg mainline road to the wind farm; and

3) The transmission line which connects the Knob Hill substation to the switchyard near Nahwitti Lake.

In this report, the term “Project Area” includes all three of the components listed above. The phrase “Wind Farm Area” refers only to component #1. In addition to the three major components, it is anticipated that a concrete batch plant will be established in Holberg.

The Knob Hill Project Area is approximately 44.77 km2 in area and is located about 12 km north of Holberg (Figure 1). The Project Area is located on an elevated ridge and is drained by a network of approximately 15 tributaries that flow into the Nahwhitti, Goodspeed and Stranby Rivers. There are also five lakes in the Project Area. The largest of these lakes is approximately 430 m x 80 m. Lake depths are unknown.

The Knob Hill Wind Farm Area will eventually contain several hundred towers connected by a network of service roads (Plate 1). These service roads will cross streams draining the Wind Farm Area. It is estimated that approximately 37 stream crossings will need to be constructed. At least some of these streams have been confirmed as fish bearing. In addition, the substation will be constructed at the point where the transmission line leaves the Wind Farm Area (Plate 1).

Access to the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area will be via Western Forest Products Limited logging roads NE 62 and NE 62D (Plate 1). These roads cross fish bearing streams at several locations. A bridge on road NE 62 will need to be replaced and new crossing structures will need to be constructed along NE 62D since this road has been deactivated.

The transmission line will cross streams flowing into the Nahwitti River, some of which are fish bearing. Some clearing of riparian trees will be required.

The objective of this fish and fish habitat assessment is to identify and recommend ways of protecting fish and fish habitat in areas potentially affected by development of the proposed Knob

1 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Hill Wind Farm Project. The goal is to manage fish and fish habitat consistent with the Department of Fisheries and Ocean’s (“DFO”) policies and guidelines, as well as the Forest and Range Practices Act and/or Land and Water BC standards.

Part of the Environmental Assessment involved determining the potential that the project has to affect fish or fish habitat. In order to determine this, the following was done: · A review of existing information; · Reconnaissance level field inspections; and · Site inspections with DFO staff.

2 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

1.1. Assessment Methodology

The overall approach of this fish and fish habitat assessment was to consider all streams to be fish bearing and conduct reconnaissance level habitat assessments of all proposed stream crossings in the field. Fish sampling and a more detailed habitat assessment will be done during the detailed design phase of the project as required.

1.1.1. Pre-Field Assessment

A pre-field assessment was conducted prior to the commencement of field sampling. This assessment was conducted according to the Resource Information Standards Committee’s (RISC) Reconnaissance (1:20,000) Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory Standards (note: RISC was formerly the Resource Inventory Committee (RIC)). The pre-field assessment included the following:

§ A review of existing data to determine what known fisheries information exists for the streams and lakes within the proposed Wind Farm Project Area. This historical review included a search of the Fisheries Information Summary System (FISS) database, interviews with local fisheries biologists, and a review of forest company files;

§ Delineation of watershed boundaries and classification of sub-basins;

§ Transcription of watershed codes for streams and water body identifiers for lakes onto TRIM 1:20,000 scale project maps;

§ Assignment of interim locator points (ILPs) for streams that do not have assigned watershed codes, or lakes that do not have assigned water body identifiers;

§ Delineation of channel reach breaks from aerial photographs and establishment of these breaks on 1:20,000 scale maps. Reach breaks were established based on significant changes in stream channel form, significant gradient changes and significant tributary confluences; and

§ Determination of stream order, pattern, confinement and basin type from aerial photographs and TRIM maps and entry of information onto RISC standard reach cards in an MS Access Field Data Information System (FDIS) database; and adding the pre-field information onto 1:20,000 TRIM project maps.

3 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

1.1.2. Fish and Habitat Sampling

Fish distribution information does not exist for most of the streams potentially affected by development of the Knob Hill Wind Farm. As the Project proceeds, the following data will be collected to fill in information gaps and to allow for detailed planning and site-specific (i.e. individual stream crossings) approvals at an operational level:

§ Fish presence, and species distribution for streams within the Project Area that may be affected by development of the wind farm; and § Quantitative data for aquatic and riparian habitats at stream crossings in the Project Area.

Fish sampling will be conducted as required, subsequent to submission of the EA Application to:

1) Establish non fish-bearing status for streams and lakes; 2) Establish the species composition; 3) Establish the seasonal use of aquatic and riparian habitats.

The reconnaissance fish habitat assessments were conducted in 2003. Fish sampling consisted of electrofishing and Gee trapping following accepted methodology (e.g. RISC Fish Collection Methods and Standards, Version 4.0, 1997). A Smith-Root Model 15C gas-powered electrofisher was used to sample for fish. Gee traps were baited with salmon roe and left in place overnight.

If fish were captured, then sampling was immediately halted and the stream declared fish habitat. Only enough sampling was conducted to ensure that the fish species diversity could be determined. If fish were not captured at the stream crossing, then the stream channel downstream of the road was inspected to determine if a barrier to fish was present or if the channel gradient was less than 20%. If the stream channel was less than 20% and it flowed into a fish bearing stream, then the stream was declared fish bearing even if no fish were captured during the summer sampling.

With respect to Dolly Varden char, it is recognised that this species (and juvenile coho) can move into and utilise streams that may be dry during the summer. Dolly Varden spawn in the fall, and George Reid (Fisheries Biologist, MWLAP) has documented spawning in seasonally flowing streams that may not support fish at other times of the year.

Because of this, George Reid has recommended that Sea Breeze conduct some fish sampling during the fall. Fall sampling was not done, however, for the following reasons: · Spawning Dolly Varden and rearing coho salmon could potentially utilise seasonal habitats for a very short period of time depending on stream conditions and the time of year; · Seasonal habitats can be utilized one year and not the next;

4 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

· The absence of fish during sampling does not prove that fish could not be present during other years; and · Sea Breeze’s approach is to consider all seasonal habitats to be fish habitats if they are connected to a watercourse that contains salmonids.

Floodplain areas are flooded during peak stream flow periods. These areas are usually only flooded for short periods of time, often only for several hours. These areas may not provide productive habitat for fish and fish may even be stranded as the stream flows recede. Floodplain areas will not automatically be considered as seasonal habitat unless a Fisheries Sensitive Zone (as defined in the FPC Riparian Management Area Guidebook, 1995) is present.

Fish habitat information was recorded on RISC Site Cards and photographs were taken. To save time, the full data set suggested in the RISC standards (1:20,000 level fish and fish habitat inventory) was not collected since this information was not required. During the field assessments, however, the whole RISC Site Card was completed whenever possible. Field data were documented on RISC field cards and entered into the FDIS database program. The following habitat parametres were measured:

¨ Channel width (m); ¨ Cover as a percent of wetted stream area ¨ Wetted width (m); stratified by type including SWD, LWD, ¨ Residual pool depth (m); boulder, undercut, deep pools, overhanging vegetation and instream ¨ Bankfull depth (m); vegetation; ¨ Gradient (%); ¨ Amount and distribution of functioning ¨ Percent crown closure; LWD; ¨ Riparian vegetation stage; ¨ Channel disturbance indicators; ¨ Temperature (°C); ¨ Channel pattern; ¨ Conductivity; ¨ Presence/absence of islands; ¨ Turbidity; ¨ Bars (side, mid, etc.); ¨ pH; ¨ Coupling; ¨ Flood signs; ¨ Confinement; ¨ Bed material (dominant and sub- ¨ Morphology pattern; and dominant); ¨ Shape and texture of right and left stream ¨ Discharge stage; banks ¨ D95 and D (cm);

Impacts to water quality, nutrient status, food supply, and riparian habitat will be assessed during the detailed fish sampling that will be conducted after the EA process has been completed. Assessment protocols for these parametres will be developed in consultation with DFO and provincial fisheries staff prior to the detailed field assessments.

5 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

In summary, all areas with the potential fish habitats, including seasonal habitats, will be considered fish bearing, unless intensive sampling demonstrates that the habitat is non fish- bearing.

1.1.3. Non Fish-Bearing Reports

If no fish are captured after extensive sampling, then non fish-bearing status for that reach, or lake, will be declared. A non fish-bearing report will be generated describing the sampling effort made and providing a rationale to support the non fish-bearing designation. It is envisioned that non fish-bearing status will require both the absence of fish and the presence of a permanent barrier to the upstream movement of fish from lower reaches. In other words, a non fish-bearing reach not only contains no fish at the time of sampling, but fish are unable to access the area from downstream (or upstream) reaches due to the presence of a permanent year-round migration barrier.

Non fish-bearing reach status will be assigned to those reaches that:

§ Fish sampling demonstrates an absence of fish (in stream reaches and lakes); § Have a channel gradient of more than 20%; § Are upstream of permanent fish migration barriers and that the reach completely dries up during at least a portion of the year; and § Are upstream of a non fish-bearing reach and there is no fish access possible from upstream reaches.

The level of sampling effort required to establish non fish-bearing status and the type of information required in a non fish-bearing status report is described in the FPC Fish-stream Identification Guidebook (1998). Any non fish-bearing status reports generated for stream reaches within the Knob Hill Project Area will meet or exceed the minimum requirements outlined in this Guidebook. Non fish-bearing status reports will be included in the detailed design documents.

1.1.4. Cumulative Effects

To determine cumulative effects, the number of crossings in each watershed (i.e. Goodspeed, Stranby, Nahwitti) was determined. An inventory of stream crossings was requested from the Ministry of Forests. Ministry staff, however, responded by saying that an inventory of stream crossings did not exist and that this information would be very difficult to compile.

Consequently, cumulative effects from stream crossings were quantified by calculating total tributary length and comparing this value to the length of stream affected by crossings proposed

6 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

by Sea Breeze. The potential impacts to fish habitat from stream crossings could then be described within a watershed-based context.

Since the precise location of Knob Hill service road stream crossings and power line right-of-way stream crossings will not be finalized until the detailed design phase of the Project, the exact area of riparian habitat (HADD) lost at each crossing site was not estimated. Instead, the likelihood of a HADD occurring at crossings where trees and/or shrubs were present was considered to be high, and the potential riparian loss was considered to be equal to the road and/or right-of-way width.

1.2. Knob Hill Wind Farm Area

Fish sampling was not conducted within the Wind Farm Area since this work will be done during the detailed design phase of the project. However, it was envisioned that a number of road crossings would be required since each wind turbine required service road access for construction and maintenance.

Since fish were observed in several streams within the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area on June 5 and 6, 2003, it was concluded that all proposed stream crossings within the wind farm should be assessed. This assessment was conducted at the request of DFO staff so that the potential effects of developing the wind farm could be evaluated during the Environmental Assessment review. The purpose of this assessment was to characterize the streams at the crossing sites both in terms of engineering aspects and the quality of fish habitat.

Based on terrain polygons developed by Terry Lewis, P.Geo., preliminary turbine locations provided by Sea Breeze, and aerial photographs, service road locations were determined by Mike Wise, P.Eng. These preliminary road locations were then transposed by hand onto 1:20,000 TRIM mapping for the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area. Stream crossing sites were identified from the air photos and plotted on the map and GPS coordinates were taken from the map so the sites could be easily located during the 2003 field assessment.

The road and turbine locations are estimated positions based on known wind patterns. However, these locations may change next year when additional meteorological data have been collected and analyzed. Due to the inability of Sea Breeze to precisely locate the wind turbines, an assessment of the reach crossing length was made at each crossing location. This was carried out to determine the potential for crossing re-location in similar stream conditions, if necessary.

Due to the preliminary nature of the turbine locations, some stream crossings may be re-located as detailed engineering and biological assessments are conducted. However, it is probable that most of the crossing sites will remain within the crossing reach even if a turbine site is moved due to road and tower construction constraints resulting from soil conditions and topography.

7 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

The identified stream crossing sites were then described for both fisheries habitat and engineering considerations in the field on August 11 and 12, 2003 by Mike Wise P.Eng., Terry Lewis P.Geo. and Shawn Hamilton R.P.Bio. Several additional sites were then assessed on October 27 and 28, 2003 by Mike Wise and Shawn Hamilton.

The quality of fish habitat was assessed as critical, important, or marginal based on descriptions provided in DFO’s Habitat Conservation and Protection Guidelines (1998). Habitat value was determinedonly at the crossing site, and habitat value within the context of the whole reach, or watershed, was not considered. This has resulted in habitat value being conservatively rated. For example, many sites would likely be downgraded as marginal if the site was evaluated within the context of the overall watershed and that site’s contribution to fish populations.

1.3. Access Roads

Both potential access roads, NE 62 and NE 62D, were walked and the potential for fish habitat was assessed. In addition, some fish sampling was conducted in stream crossings, and adjacent streams to access road NE 62D in the late summer of 2003. Since crossing structures have been removed during road deactivation, the streams that cross these roads are literally ditches with no instream cover or riparian vegetation. Consequently, fish habitat and riparian vegetation was not described for these sites.

A combination of fish sampling, visual inspection of the stream channel downstream of the road, and professional judgment was used to determine if a stream was non fish-bearing at the road crossing.

The primary goal of fish sampling streams along NE 62D was to supplement existing fish distribution information to further understand fish distribution. The portion of Branch NE 62D that was flooded was not sampled as originally planned since an alternative road route that completely avoids this area was found.

1.4. Transmission Line

Stream crossings along the proposed transmission line route were assessed by Mike Wise, GeoWise Engineering and Brad Bodnar, Tricouni Forest Management. Streams were defined as having washed gravel in the channel and/or a defined drainage pattern.

The species and height of riparian vegetation at each stream crossing was described. Channel width and depth were recorded at a single location, and channel gradient was determined by averaging upstream and downstream channel gradients. A Suunto clinometer was used to measure channel gradient.

8 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

The FPC stream class (S1 to S6) was assigned to each stream based on channel width. Ephemeral streams were classed as S6 (non fish-bearing). Stream crossings, however, were not assessed by a professional fisheries biologist. Consequently, for the purpose of this assessment all streams identified have been considered fish bearing until such time as a fisheries assessment can be conducted.

9 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

2. EXISTING FISHERIES INFORMATION

This section summarizes known fish distribution and species composition in the Knob Hill Project Area. A number of data sources were utilized including:

§ The Fisheries Information Summary System (“FISS”) database; § Forest licensees and local fisheries consultants; and § The BC Conservation Data Centre.

2.1. Limitations of Existing Fisheries Data

For the purposes of this assessment, all streams (including off channel areas, ponds, seasonally wetted areas, etc.) with channel gradients of less than 20% were considered fish habitat, unless non fish-bearing status had been established.

The quality of existing fish distribution information can be poor, particularly older inventory information that may be stored in the FISS database. Consequently, unless the quality of data could be determined to be acceptable, the existing fisheries information was used as a guide to planning only.

The exceptions are RISC (formerly RIC) 1:20,000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory reports which have passed a stringent Quality Assurance review by a third party. These reports contain reliable fish and fish habitat information that has been collected consistent with RISC Standards. Non fish-bearing status (see Section 2.3) reports may also be included in these inventory reports.

During a search for existing fisheries information it was discovered that a RISC 1:20,000 Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory had been completed for the Nahwitti watershed. Although this report had been completed in 2000, the information had not been entered into the FISS database. Locating a copy of this report was a lengthy process since the regional WALP library in Nanaimo had closed and the report was in the process of being moved to the Ministry of Forests library in Victoria. This report was located by Ministry staff and is now available for viewing in Victoria. Since this report was not located until a few days ago, any relevant information that it may contain has not been included in this assessment report.

This is not a concern since Sea Breeze has taken the position that all streams (seasonal habitats, off-channel areas, etc.) with channel gradients less than 20% will be considered potential fish habitat unless detailed fisheries information is available that says otherwise.

10 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

This RISC report will be studied in the next several weeks to determine if it contains any information relevant to the Knob Hill Project. If so, this information will be utilized during the detailed design phase of the Project (after the EA review).

2.2. RISC Mapping

A total of 632 stream reaches and 36 lake/wetland reaches were identified in the Knob Hill Project Area during the pre-field assessment. Pre-field information for each reach was collected and entered into the FDIS database. Known fish distribution information was also mapped.

Copies of the project maps and a CD containing the FDIS database have been submitted to the Resource Information Branch of the Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management.

2.3. Knob Hill Wind Farm Area

Although the FISS database contains fisheries information for the Nahwitti, Goodspeed, and Stranby Rivers, the database contained no fisheries information for the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area. In addition, no record of any fish sampling by forestry companies was found during office searches and telephone inquiries.

Fishfor Contracting Ltd., a fisheries consulting firm based in Port McNeill, has conducted some fish sampling on both Bragg and Tyllia Creeks at sites downstream of the Wind Farm Area. Fishfor staff captured cutthroat trout in Bragg Creek at a location approximately 2.0 km downstream of the Project Area. Similarly, Fishfor staff captured cutthroat trout in Tyllia Creek at a location approximately 2.2 km downstream of the Project Area. Bragg and Tyllia Creeks are tributaries to the Nahwitti River.

Other than the fish sampling conducted in Bragg and Tyllia Creeks by Fishfor, no other fisheries information for the Wind Farm Area could be found. It is not likely that any fisheries assessments have been conducted within the Wind Farm Area, since no forestry-related activities such as road building, etc. have occurred.

The FISS database does, however, list fish species that are known to be present in the Goodspeed, Stranby, and Nahwitti River watersheds. Table 1 summarizes this information.

11 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Table 1 Summary of fish species recorded in the Goodspeed, Nahwitti, and Stranby watersheds according to the FISS database.

Watershed: Goodspeed River Nahwitti River Stranby River Watershed Code: 930-894800 920-953700 920-969500

Chinook salmon yes Chum salmon yes yes yes Coho salmon yes yes yes Pink salmon yes yes yes Sockeye salmon yes Kokanee yes

Brook trout yes Cutthroat trout yes yes yes Rainbow trout yes Steehead trout yes yes yes

Dolly Varden char yes yes

Although this list may not be complete, knowledge of the fish species that could be present is helpful when assessing habitat value in the field, determining when and where to sample for fish, and for designing mitigation and compensation strategies.

2.4. Access Road

The development of a wind farm on the top of Knob Hill will require the construction and maintenance of an all season access road. A number of potential routes were assessed by GeoWise Engineering and were discarded as not practical. A preliminary fisheries assessment was conducted on the two remaining potential routes:

1. Branch NE 62; and 2. Branch NE 62D.

Both these roads are existing logging roads that have been deactivated within the last several years. Branch NE 62 is within the upper Goodspeed River watershed and Branch NE 62D is located within the watershed of a large tributary to the Nahwitti River.

12 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

2.4.1. Existing Fisheries Information for Branch NE 62

Branch NE 62 is located in the Goodspeed watershed. Existing fisheries information for the Goodspeed River shows that the mainstem and the lower reaches of tributaries contain resident cutthroat trout. Consequently, a number of streams that flow across Branch NE 62 may support fish. These stream crossings are located along the portion of NE 62 from approximately kilometre 18.5 to kilometre 20.5.

A falls located lower on the Goodspeed River prevents the upstream migration of all species of fish. This migration barrier is located approximately 24.5 km upstream of the estuary, and is downstream of the reaches of the Goodspeed that could be affected by the development of Branch NE 62.

Coho salmon juveniles have been captured in the Goodspeed River mainstem in the vicinity of the bridge location on Branch NE 62. It was determined, however, that staff from the Cordy Creek fish hatchery had released these fish into this reach of the Goodspeed. The Cordy Creek fish hatchery is located on the lower Goodspeed River near Holberg.

2.4.2. Existing Fisheries Information for Branch NE 62D

Branch NE 62D is almost entirely located in the Nahwitti River watershed. Although no fisheries information for streams associated with Branch NE 62D could be found in the FISS database, a 1999 memo from Fishfor Contracting to Western Forest Products Ltd. states that coho and trout were captured at several stream crossings in the first kilometre of this road. Based on this information, it was concluded that streams that cross at least the first 1.7 km of Branch NE 62D likely contain fish habitat.

2.5. Transmission Line

The proposed transmission line route extends from the Knob Hill Wind Farm to a switching yard located at the junction of the Holberg and Nahwitti Forest Service Roads (Appendix 4). The length of the transmission line ROW will be approximately 11.2 km and crosses approximately 18 streams that are tributaries to the Nahwitti River.

The FISS database contains no fisheries information for the transmission line stream crossings. A list of fish species present in the Nahwitti River watershed has been provided in Table 1.

13 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

2.6. Rare and Endangered Fish Species

The BC Conservation Data Centre, at the Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management, in Victoria, has conducted a search of their records to determine if listed fish species are present in the Knob Hill area. No records for red or blue-listed fish species, or species listed with COSEWIC, were found.

14 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

3. RESULTS OF FIELD ASSESSMENTS

Several field assessments were conducted within the Project Area. Assessments were conducted on the following dates:

§ April 10 and 11, 2003 – Inspected access roads NE 62 and NE 62D; § June 4 to 6, 2003 – Inspected access roads and streams on Knob Hill with DFO. Agency tour on June 5; § July 9 to 10, 2003 – Inspected proposed transmission line right-of-way along NE 62 and the substation site; § August 11 to 13, 2003 – Conducted stream crossing assessments for tower service roads on Knob Hill; § October 28 to 30, 2003 – Inspected selected stream crossings on Knob Hill and sampled for fish along NE 62D access route; and § December 11, 2003 – Inspected stream crossings along the proposed transmission line corridor (conducted by GeoWise Engineering and Brad Bodnar, a forest technologist).

Below is a list of the reconnaissance level fisheries assessments completed for the Environmental Assessment:

1. Stream crossing assessment for tower service roads in the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area; 2. Access road assessment; and 3. Stream and riparian assessment along the transmission line right-of-way (GeoWise Engineering).

3.1. Knob Hill Wind Farm Area

Several fisheries field assessments were conducted within the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area in 2003. On June 6, 2003 several streams, including portions of Bragg and Tyllia Creeks, were walked. Cutthroat trout were observed in both Creeks, and in a third creek to the west of Bragg Creek. Based on these observations, and because stream gradients were relatively low, it was concluded that fish use within the Wind Farm Area could potentially be extensive.

In a subsequent assessment, a total of 37 stream crossings within the Knob Hill Wind Farm were assessed. The fisheries habitat data were recorded on RISC Site Cards. A Site Card Report was generated using the RISC FDIS database program. This report is provided in Appendix 1.

Table 2 summarizes the habitat characteristics at the 37 proposed service road crossings within the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area.

15 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Table 2 Summary of aquatic habitat characteristics at the access road stream crossings - Knob Hill Wind Farm Area, 2003.

Stream Channel Substrate Description Water Crossing Average Average Channel Dmax (cm) D95 (cm) Dominant/ pH Cond. Gradient width (m) Depth (m) Subdominant uS/cm Materials

SC001 3.5% 1.2 0.40 fine fine fines/gravel 5.8 22.9 SC002 6.3% 1.6 0.35 10.0 50.0 boulder/cobble 7.9 119.0 SC003 2.0% 1.3 0.60 fine fine fines 6.9 34.5 SC004 1.5% 2.5 0.30 fine fine fines 4.9 29.9 SC005 2.8% 0.8 0.30 fine fine fines 6.4 28.9 SC006 4.5% 0.8 0.30 5.0 20.0 cobble/gravel 6.5 24.5 SC007 5.3% 1.0 0.40 1.5 18.0 cobble/boulder 7.5 53.6 SC008 4.8% 1.3 0.50 3.0 20.0 boulder/cobble 7.3 51.5 SC009 4.5% 4.6 0.80 8.0 40.0 boulder/cobble 7.9 68.6 SC010 6.0% 1.1 0.45 <1 30.0 boulder/gravel 7.2 51.0 SC011 7.5% 0.9 0.80 <2 20.0 cobble/gravel 6.4 26.3 SC012 2.0% 1.2 0.40 5.0 25.0 cobble/gravel 7.0 50.9 SC013 6.0% 1.1 0.60 <5 40.0 boulder/cobble 6.6 26.9 SC014 5.5% 1.2 0.45 <3 15.0 cobble/boulder 6.6 23.8 SC015 4.0% 1.4 0.40 5.0 30.0 cobble/boulder 6.3 24.9 SC016 6.5% 0.4 0.30 <3 30.0 boulder/fine 6.7 50.2 SC017 6.3% 0.4 0.15 fine fine fines 6.4 90.1 SC018 6.0% 0.7 0.30 <3 20.0 cobble/gravel 6.5 36.4 SC019 6.5% 2.0 0.60 10.0 30.0 boulder/cobble 6.7 24.3 SC020 6.5% 1.0 0.45 <5 25.0 cobble/boulder 7.0 54.4 SC021 4.5% 1.3 0.65 10.0 22.0 cobble/boulder 7.2 49.4 SC022 6.5% 0.7 0.70 fine fine fines 6.1 36.5 SC023 6.0% 0.5 0.35 fine fine fines 5.9 29.6 SC024 7.0% 0.4 0.40 <2 20.0 cobble/gravel 6.5 43.7 SC025 5.3% 0.6 0.45 <2 15.0 cobble/fines 6.4 29.9 SC026 8.0% 0.5 0.40 5.0 20.0 cobble/gravel 6.4 28.1 SC027 7.5% 1.1 0.50 7.0 10.0 gravel/cobble 5.9 20.6 SC028 3.3% 4.2 0.75 10.0 20.0 gravel/cobble 6.5 23.0 SC029 No Visible Channel SC030 6.0% 2.0 0.50 5.0 15.0 gravel/cobble 5.5 17.9 SC031 6.0% 1.2 0.60 <5 20.0 cobble/gravel 6.1 23.5

16 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

SC032 6.3% 1.3 0.85 5.0 25.0 cobble/gravel 6.5 18.6 SC033 7.5% 1.1 0.70 5.0 18.0 cobble/gravel 5.8 19.9 SC034 6.0% 1.4 0.65 5.0 16.0 cobble/gravel 5.5 21.2 SC035 1.3% 0.9 0.45 fine fine fines 6.7 68.6 SC036 6.5% 2.2 0.60 15.0 30.0 boulder/cobble 5.2 40.6 SC037 10.5% 2.5 1.10 20.0 50.0 boulder/bedrock 4.8 49.0

Stream channel and riparian characteristics were recorded during this assessment and several photographs were taken of each site. In addition to these direct observations, habitat potential was ranked based on professional judgment. This information, including photographs, has been combined with engineering data collected by Mike Wise P. Eng. and reported in (Appendix C of Wise (2004).

Channel gradients at most of the proposed service road crossings are less than 7 %, and only five streams are wider than 2 m. The measured channel depths of the streams are all less than 1 m except crossing SC037, which is 1.1 m deep. The channel substrate varies from fine silt to boulders. The channel substrate at seven crossings consists entirely of fines; the remaining sites consist of substrate comprised of various combinations of fines, gravel, cobble, boulders and bedrock (Table 1).

It is interesting to note that cobble-sized, or larger, substrate particles are present at 28 of the 37 crossing sites even though the average channel width of these crossings is 1.4 m and the average gradient to 6%. It was concluded that these cobbles and boulders are lag particles that were exposed during formation of the channel and that they are too large to be transported downstream during peak stream flows.

Consequently, although cobbles and boulders are present at most of the crossing sites, channel gradients, widths, and depths indicate that many streams, particularly the headwater reaches, on Knob Hill have low stream power and little geomorphic activity.

Conductivity and pH values measured in the streams were all within the range that is expected given the types of soil and bedrock present in the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area.

Table 2 provides a summary of the type and relative quality of fish habitat at the Knob Hill service road crossings. Of the 37 stream crossing sites assessed, fish were observed at nine crossing locations. Although fish sampling in streams within the Wind Farm Area has yet to be conducted, it is anticipated that fish will be present in most watersheds.

This high proportion of fish bearing streams within the Wind Farm Area does not necessarily mean that fish are at all stream crossings, since many stream crossings are located in the uppermost reaches.

17 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Fish habitat potential at the crossing sites and the ability of fish to access the crossing sites from downstream fish-bearing reaches were also assessed. Of the 37 potential stream crossing sites assessed, fish were observed at, or near, nine crossings and were deemed to contain important habitat. Aquatic habitats at 13 crossing sites were considered to have a moderate to high potential (important) to support fish, and habitats at 16 sites were considered marginal.

Table 3 Summary of assessment of the type and relative quality of fish habitat at the access road stream crossings -Knob Hill Wind Farm Area.

Stream Fish Habitat* Stream Fish Habitat* Crossing Crossing Type Relative Quality Type Relative Quality

SC001 (rearing) marginal SC020 rearing important SC002 REARING IMPORTANT SC021 REARING IMPORTANT SC003 rearing important SC022 (rearing) marginal SC004 (rearing) marginal SC023 (rearing) marginal SC005 REARING IMPORTANT SC024 (rearing) marginal SC006 REARING IMPORTANT SC025 rearing marginal SC007 rearing important SC026 rearing marginal SC008 rearing important SC027 REARING/spawning IMPORTANT SC009 REARING IMPORTANT SC028 REARING/spawning IMPORTANT SC010 (rearing) marginal SC029 (rearing) marginal SC011 rearing marginal SC030 REARING/spawning IMPORTANT SC012 (rearing) important SC031 rearing important SC013 rearing important SC032 REARING IMPORTANT SC014 rearing/spawning important SC033 rearing important SC015 rearing important SC034 (rearing) marginal SC016 (rearing) marginal SC035 (rearing) marginal SC017 (rearing) marginal SC036 rearing important SC018 rearing important SC037 rearing important SC019 rearing important * Uppercase indicates that fish were observed.

Marginal habitat value was assigned to those sites where the streams were very small and/or discontinuous and fish access was improbable. Fish use of these sites was considered unlikely and the habitat had a very low potential to produce fish even if fish were present at the site (Photo 1).

For the purposes of the Environmental Assessment, however, all sites, even marginal sites, are considered to contain fish habitat until fish sampling demonstrates otherwise.

18 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Photo 1 Stream crossing site SC022 showing marginal fish habitat consisting of isolated pools with no continuous stream channel.

The type, stage and degree of crown closure of the riparian vegetation present at each stream crossing were recorded and this information is summarized in Table 3.

The riparian vegetation community was in its natural undisturbed state at all stream crossings since no forest harvesting has been conducted within the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area. The presence of grass or shrubs, therefore, is not a seral vegetation stage but represents the climax plant community. In other words, if trees are not present, it is because site conditions do not support the growth of large trees.

The dominant riparian vegetation is grass (Photo 1) at six sites and a mixture of grass and shrubs (Photo 2) at 13 sites. Of the remaining 18 sites, only seven sites have a crown closure of greater than 20%. Of these seven sites, sites 33 and 34 have the highest crown closure values of between 41 and 70% (Photo 3).

19 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Table 4 Summary of the riparian vegetation at the access road stream crossings -Knob Hill Wind Farm

Stream Riparian Vegetation Stream Riparian Vegetation Crossing Crossing Type* Stage** Crown Type* Stage** Crown Closure*** Closure***

SC001 G & S n/a 0 SC020 G & C MF 1 SC002 S & C MF 1 SC021 G & C MF 1 SC003 C MF 2 SC022 G n/a 0 SC004 C MF 1 SC023 G & C MF 1 SC005 G & S n/a 1 SC024 G & S n/a 0 SC006 G & C MF 1 SC025 G & C MF 1 SC007 G & C MF 1 SC026 C MF 1 SC008 G & C MF 1 SC027 G & C MF 1 SC009 S & C MF 1 SC028 S & C MF 1 SC010 G n/a 0 SC029 SC011 C MF 2 SC030 S & C MF 2 SC012 G n/a 0 SC031 S & C MF 2 SC013 G n/a 0 SC032 C MF 2 SC014 G & S n/a 0 SC033 C MF 3 SC015 G & S n/a 0 SC034 S & C MF 3 SC016 G n/a 0 SC035 C MF 2 SC017 G n/a 0 SC036 S & C MF 2 SC018 G n/a 0 SC037 C MF 1 SC019 G & C MF 1 * G = grass; S = shrub; C = conifer ** MF = mature forest *** Crown Closure: 0 = 0; 1 = 1 to 20%; 2 = 21 to 40%; 3 = 41 to 70%

20 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Photo 2 Stream crossing SC010 showing s riparian zone consisting of a mixture of grass and shrubs

Photo 3 Stream crossing site 34 with a tree canopy closure of between 41 and70%

21 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

3.1.1. Cumulative Effects Related to the Knob Hill Service Roads

Open bottom crossing structures will be used at stream crossings when the stream channel contains fish habitat. In addition, the streams are small enough so the abutments can be set back from the edge of the bank and equipment can construct the crossing from one bank. Consequently, potential impacts to fish habitat are expected to be almost entirely related to a loss of riparian vegetation (see Section 7.0 for additional information).

To determine the potential cumulative impact of this loss of riparian vegetation, stream crossings have been grouped by watershed and vegetation type. Table 5 summarizes this information. The service road crossings are located within seven discreet tributaries to the Stranby, Nahwitti and Goodspeed Rivers.

Table 5 Summary of dominant vegetation types for wind farm service road stream crossings. Number of Stream Dominant Riparian Vegetation Stream Type Crossing Watershed Code Name River Grasses Grasses Trees System and Shrubs

3 920-953700-18400 Nahwitti 0 2 1 6 920-953700-06200 Tyllia Nahwitti 0 1 5 3 920-953700-4000 Nahwitti 1 1 1 2 920-953700-06200-10700 Bragg Nahwitti 1 1 0 12 920-960500-07600 Stranby 4 7 1 9 920-969500-61900 Obling Stranby 0 1 8 2 930-894800-49300 Goodspeed 0 0 2 Totals: 6 13 18

It is expected that service road width (including ditches) will be eight (8) metres at stream crossings. Therefore, the minimum area that the riparian vegetation would be effected is eight metres times the width of the riparian habitat on each side of the stream channel. This area could be slightly more if some additional trees need to be removed to provide additional swing room for the excavator during crossing installation.

No HADD is expected at the six crossings where the riparian area is grass. The potential for a HADD (loss of riparian habitat) is deemed as high at all crossings where shrubs and/or trees are present. For the purpose of this assessment, the amount of loss at these sites is equal to the eight- meter road width. The actual loss will be significantly lower since the riparian areas at many

22 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

stream crossings were sparsely forested and it may be possible to build the road with very little loss of trees or shrubs.

To determine potential cumulative impact on riparian habitat for the tributaries listed in Table 5, the lengths of stream channel was calculated from the 1:20,000 TRIM maps. These lengths, along with the lengths of the riparian areas lost are presented in Table 6.

Table 6 Summary of the cumulative effect that the Knob Hill service road crossings will potentially have on the riparian zone.

Stream Length of Riparian Areas and Percentage Affected Number of Total Tributary Length (m) of Stream River Percent of Riparian Watershed Code Length (m) in Wind Riparian Zone Crossing* System Zone Effected Farm** Effected***

3 920-953700-18400 Nahwitti 5,600 24 0.43% 6 920-953700-06200 Nahwitti 22,400 48 0.21% 2 920-953700-40000 Nahwitti 11,400 16 0.14% 1 920-953700-06200-10700 Nahwitti 12,400 8 0.06% 8 920-960500-07600 Stranby 36,600 64 0.17% 9 920-969500-61900 Stranby 21,200 72 0.34% 2 930-894800-49300 Goodspeed 8,800 16 0.18% Totals: 118,400 248 0.21%

* Crossings with grass riparian areas have not been included. ** Total length refers to the length of that particular tributary that lies within the Wind Farm Area.

Results of the cumulative effects of potential riparian loss calculations are presented in Table 6. These figures represent a conservative estimate for the following reasons:

§ All riparian crossings where shrubs and/or trees were present were included in the cumulative effects calculations; § The “percent of riparian area affected” is based on the channel length within the Wind Farm Area, not the total length of the tributary; and § The “total tributary length (m) in the wind farm” is the length of tributaries that have crossings. Tributaries within the wind farm with no crossings were not included.

As can be seen in Table 6, the total amount of riparian area affected is 0.21% of the total stream length in the wind farm. The cumulative effects for the individual tributaries range from 0.06 to 0.43%. The tributaries where the cumulative effects were higher were tributaries where only the uppermost few reaches were within the Wind Farm.

23 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

In summary, the proportion of the riparian area affected for each tributary is very small and cumulative effects are not anticipated, especially since compensation works are proposed for each of these watersheds.

3.2. Knob Hill Access Road

Year-round access to the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area will be required. Consequently, an access road will need to be developed. Mike Wise, P.Eng. of GeoWise Engineering has assessed a number of potential route options for the Knob Hill access road. Preliminary fisheries assessments were conducted on two route options.

Two potential access road routes were walked on April 10 and 11, 2003. This initial access road inspection was conducted primarily as a risk assessment to identify potential fisheries concerns specific to each route option.

The two potential route options assessed were:

1. Branch NE 62; and 2. Branch NE 62D.

Both these roads are existing logging roads that have been deactivated within the last several years. Branch NE 62 is within the upper Goodspeed River watershed and Branch NE 62D is located within the watershed of a large tributary to the Nahwitti River (Plate 1).

3.2.1. Fisheries Assessment of Route Options

Branch NE 62 was inspected on April 10, 2003 and the results are presented in Appendix 2. Access road development along this route would involve the construction of a large bridge over the mainstem of the north fork of the Goodspeed River (Photo 4). In addition, there are at least five additional potential fish streams that would need to be crossed, at least one of which would require a bridge.

Due to concerns that the road would fail, or contribute to a landslide, several road sections adjacent to the Goodspeed mainstem were de-built (photo 5) several years ago when the road was deactivated. The total length of the de-built road sections is 700 m.

24 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Photo 4 Deactivated bridge site on the north Fork of the Goodspeed River mainstem – road NE 62

Photo 5 De-built section on NE 62

25 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

This route option, if it were chosen, would have a moderately high potential to negatively impact the fisheries resource of the Goodspeed River watershed due to a high potential for sedimentation.

Branch NE 62D was inspected on April 11, 2003 and the results are in Appendix 2. On April 11, 2003 a 120 meter portion of the NE 62D road was flooded with water due to a series of beaver dams. Since this pond had the potential to support fish, GeoWise Engineering looked for, and located, an alternative route that would bypass this potential habitat.

The first 1.7 km of NE 62D is very flat, as is the surrounding land. There are several cross ditches that connect ponded water on each side of the road. One stream on Branch NE 62D-1 was approximately 4.0 m wide and had the potential to support fish. No sections of the deactivated NE 62D road had been de-built.

It is concluded that NE 62D is the preferred route option from a fisheries perspective since developing this road as an access road to Knob Hill has significantly less inherent risk than route option NE 62. The potential for deposits of sediment into fish habitat along NE 62 is much greater than it is for NE 62D.

Finally, GeoWise Engineering has completed an initial assessment of access road options and has concluded that road NE 62D is the best route option from an engineering and geotechnical perspective.

3.3. Access Road NE 62D

The NE 62D option is the preferred route to access the Knob Hill Wind Farm. The NE 62D road was constructed by Western Forest Products Limited and has since been de-activated (Plate 1). NE 62D starts (km 0.0) at the NE 62 mainline at 5.0 km from the Holberg mainline. The road is relatively flat for the first 1.65 km. At 1.65 km is a road junction where road NE 62D-1 starts to climb the southern slope of Knob Hill. At 3.9km from the NE 62 mainline, is a short spur road named NE 62D-1B-2 that will be extended to access the Wind Farm Area.

NE 62D and NE 62D-1 currently have approximately 42 cross ditches between km 0.0 and 3.9. Four of these cross ditches contained flowing streams at the time of the survey, several connect flooded areas on each side of the road (km 0.0 to km 1.65), and the remaining were dry or contained ditch water and/or intercepted ground water.

Beaver activity adjacent to the lower 1.65 km of road NE 62D has resulted in the formation of a relatively large pond that has flooded a section of the road. This area was initially identified as a fisheries concern since the flooded portion of the road was potential fish habitat.

26 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

GeoWise Engineering located and assessed an alternative route. This alternative route (see Plate 1) follows road NE 62D-8 (which joins NE 62D at approximately 0.665 km) and spur 8B. Approximately 300 m of new road would need to be constructed to connect the end of the spur 8B to NE 62D-1. A new bridge or large culvert would be required on Stream A.

In summary, the preferred access route to the Knob Hill wind farm consists of the following road sections:

Table 7 Description of road sections for the preferred Wind Farm access route.

Road Section Description Length* (km)

1 NE 62 from the Holberg mainline to NE 62D: 5.00 km; 5.000 2 NE 62D from NE 62 to NE 62D-8: 0.665 km; 0.665 3 NE 62D-8 and spur 8: 0.975 km; 0.975 4 new road from spur 8 to ND 62D-1: 0.300 km; 0.300 5 NE 62D-1 from new road to NE 62D-1B-2: 1.750 6 spur road NE 62D-1B-2 0.225 7 new road from end of spur NE 62D-1B-2 to wind farm 0.575

Total Road Distance: 9.49 * Lengths of road sections are approximate.

The results of visual assessments conducted on April 11, 2003 and the fish sampling conducted on October 29 and 30, 2003 are summarized below:

¨ Road Section 1. NE 62 from the Holberg mainline to NE 62D

No fish sampling was conducted along this section of the access road since the current road can be utilised by Sea Breeze without any significant upgrading. Drainage culverts and bridges are currently in place and are adequate for wind farm development with one exception. This exception is the replacement of one bridge located 2.66 km from the Holberg mainline (Plate 1).

¨ Road Section 2. NE 62D from NE 62 to NE 62D-8

This section of road has been deactivated and four culverts have been removed. Three of these cross ditches contained water fish sampling and were sampled for fish during October, 2003 (photo 6). The results from sampling these sites, and a fourth site located past the NE 62D-8 turnoff, are summarized below:

27 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Photo 6 Site #3 on road section 2 – a juvenile coho was captured

Table 8 Summary of fish sampling results for access Road Section 2.

SITE LOCATION (M) SAMPLING GEAR FISH CAPTURED

1 160 EF no catch 2 395 EF & Traps no catch 3 492 EF & Traps coho (fork length 95 mm) NE 62D-8 665 4 745 EF coho, Dolly Varden, cutthroat trout

Although no fish were captured at sites 1 and 2, it is assumed that these areas support fish until such time as non fish-bearing status can be established. Site 4 is not on the proposed access route since it is 80 m past the turnoff onto NE 62D-8 bypass route. The catch results at Site 4, however, confirm that coho salmon, cutthroat trout (photo 7), and Dolly Varden are present in the area.

28 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Photo 7 Cutthroat trout captured at Site 4, Road Section 2

Several additional sites further along NE 62D (past the NE 62-D turnoff) were sampled (Appendix 3). These results confirm that the beaver pond area and flooded section of NE 62D (Sites 5 to 7) support cutthroat trout. Coho and Dolly Varden are also likely present, but were not captured in the beaver pond due to the limited sampling effort. Coho and Dolly Varden were, however, captured at site 8 located at the outlet of the beaver pond (Appendix 3).

¨ Road Section 3. NE 62D-8 bypass route

This section of road has been deactivated and 12 culverts had been removed. Five of the cross ditches contained water during the October 30, 2003 fish sampling and these were sampled for fish. The results are summarized below: Table 9 Summary of fish sampling results for access Road Section 3.

SITE LOCATION (M) SAMPLING GEAR FISH CAPTURED

8-1 419 EF no catch 8-2 510 EF no catch 8-3 778 EF no catch 8-4 900 EF no catch 8-5 976 EF no catch

29 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

No fish were captured at any site and the fisheries potential at these sites was deemed to be extremely low (photo 8). Stream channels downstream of the road were not apparent at four of the sites. The fifth site (Site 8-5) had a channel gradient of 35% downstream of the road. Site 8-3 consisted of 4 m x 5 m pond on the upstream side of the road. This pond has formed as a result of water from the road ditch filling what appeared to be a small borrow pit.

Photo 8 Flowing cross ditch at Site 8-2 on Road Section 3 – low habitat potential

A summary of habitat parametres at the fish sample sites is provided in Table 10.

Table 10 Summary of fish sample site habitat parameters for Road Section 3 Site Location (m) Average Maximum pH Conductivity Temperature wetted width wetted depth (ºC) (m) (m)

8-1 419 0.60 0.08 6.4 7.9 7.6 8-2 510 0.99 0.13 6.2 8.25 8.6 8-3 778 Pond 4 x 5 0.30 6.5 7.46 7.9 8-4 900 0.67 0.10 6.3 6.7 8.4 8-5 976 2.23* 0.10 6.0 7.2 7.6 * Average width is 2.23 m due to presence of swampy area.

30 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

In summary, the fish sampling conducted on October 30, 2003 and field observations suggest that the sites sampled along this road section are non fish-bearing. Additional sampling is recommended prior to declaring non fish-bearing status, however, since fish use at other times of the year is a possibility. The cross ditch with the highest potential to support fish was not electrofished since it was dry. This cross ditch is located at 98 m and is only 130 m (as the crow flies) from Site 8-5. Since the terrain in this area is flat, the cross ditch at 98 m could be seasonally flooded and fish could then be present. The cross ditches further along this road section have considerably less fish potential (Site 8-1 to 8-5).

¨ Road Section 4. New road from spur 8 to ND 62D

This 300 m section of road has not been constructed. The proposed route runs through a stand of second growth conifers and joins NE 62D-1 (Plate 1). The proposed road alignment was traversed by Mike Wise P.Eng., and no streams were observed.

¨ Road Sections 5 to 7. NE 62D-1 from end of bypass route to Wind Farm

Road Section 5 starts at Site A-3 where a new crossing is proposed on Stream A (Plate 1). The October 29, 2003 fish sampling in Road Sections 5 to 7 was limited to Stream A.

The road in Sections 5 and 6 has been deactivated and 26 cross ditches and three streams were observed during the April 11, 2003 assessment (Appendix 2). The three streams are probably non fish-bearing due to the high gradients of the channels downstream of the road. A more rigorous assessment during the detailed design phase of this Project will be required to confirm this.

Road Section 6 (spur road NE 62D-1B-2) and Road Section 7 (to be constructed) were not assessed to determine fisheries potential. Although further fisheries assessment is required, it is very unlikely that fish habitat is located along these two Road Sections.

Stream A crosses road NE 62D-1 at 2022m (Appendix 2). This crossing has been deactivated (photo 9) and the channel is approximately 4 m wide. This site is considered to be a potential riparian compensation site (see Section 7.2). The proposed crossing is located 143 m upstream of this location and is referred to as Site A-3.

31 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Photo 9 NE 62D-1 deactivated crossing on Stream A

Fish sampling was conducted in Stream A to determine fish distribution. The results are summarized in Table 11.

Table 11 Summary of fish sampling results for Creek A – Oct. 29, 2003

SITE LOCATION SAMPLING FISH CAPTURED/COMMENTS (m)* GEAR

A-1 371 to 385 EF cutthroat trout Sediment wedge 435 Barrier to upstream fish migration. A-2 471 to 673 EF no catch NE 62D-1 530 deactivated road crossing A-3 673 site of proposed road crossing * Distance as measured from mainstem of the Nahwitti River tributary.

The sediment wedge located at 435 m is an upstream barrier to fish migration. Cutthroat trout were captured at Site A-1 located downstream of this barrier. A 202 m long section (Site A-2) of the stream channel upstream of the barrier was intensively sampled with an electrofisher and no fish were captured, or observed.

32 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

It is concluded that Creek A is currently non fish-bearing upstream of the sediment wedge located at 435 m. However, the stream channel up to and including the proposed crossing, will be managed as fish habitat for the following reasons:

§ This stream reach was probably fish bearing until the sediment wedge was formed approximately 25 years ago (rough estimate based on the size of alders growing in the deposit); and § The sediment wedge is not a permanent barrier since it will gradually breakdown over the years as logs rot and the sediment deposit is eroded downstream.

In summary, no fish were captured in Stream A at the proposed road crossing location (site A-3) since there is an impassable barrier located downstream. Since the barrier consists of a sediment wedge, it is not considered a permanent barrier to fish. Consequently, Stream A at the proposed road crossing is considered to be potential fish habitat and will be managed as such.

3.4. Transmission Line

The proposed transmission line route extends from the Knob Hill Wind Farm to a switching yard located at the junction of the Holberg and Nahwitti Forest Service Roads (Plate 1). The length of the transmission line ROW is about 11.2 km. The proposed transmission line route runs adjacent to the Nahwitti Forest Service Road and it crosses approximately 18 streams that are tributaries to the Nahwitti River and crosses the Nahwitti mainstem twice. Results of the stream crossing assessment for the transmission line are provided in Appendix 4. Table 12 summarizes the results.

33 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Table 12 Summary of transmission line stream crossing survey – Dec. 14, 2003

Plate 1 Stream Channel Riparian Vegetation Location Width Depth Gradient FPC Height Type (M) (m) % Class* (m)

A TL002 0.9 0.4 15-20 S4 Cw-Imm 1.5 B TL003 5.5 0.9 2-4 S2/S3 CwHw-Imm (Dr vets) 6 to 10 C TL004 9.0 1.6 3-6 S2/S3 CwHw-Imm (Dr vets) 6 to 20 D TL005 2.0 0.5 0 S3/S4 CwHw-Imm (Dr vets) 6 to 10 E TL006 3.0 0.9 0-6 S3/S4 CwHw-Imm (Dr vets) 1.5 (10) F TL008 2.0 0.3 0 S3/S4 CwHw-Imm (Dr vets) 2 - 3 (15) G TL009 0.4 0.2 4-7 S4 CwHw-Imm (Dr vets) 6 (18) H TL010 7.8 1.2 2-6 S2/S3 CwHw-Imm (Dr vets) 8 (18) 50% CwHw Mat; I TL012 0.3 0.1 15-25 S6 6 to 25 50% CwHw Imm 50% CwHw Mat; J TL013 0.4 0.2 10-25 S6 6 to 25 50% CwHw Imm K TL014 2.4 0.5 5-20 S3/S4 CwHw-Imm 1 to 3 L TL015 0.6 0.3 2-5 S4 CwHw-Mat 5 to 25 50% CwHw Mat; 5 to 25 M TL016 6.0 0.6 5-12 S2/S3 50% CwHw Imm; (DR (18) vets) N TL017 0.4 0.2 3-55 S4/S6 CwHw-Imm (Dr vets) 6 (18) O TL018 1.2 0.2 0-2 S4 CwHw-Imm (Dr vets) 6 (18) 50% CwHw Mat; P TL020 0.8 0.3 5-12 S4/S6 5 to 25 50% CwHw Imm 50% CwHw Mat; Q TL021 4.6 4.6 5-12 S2/S3 50% CwHw Imm; (DR 5 to 25 vets) R TL022 3.9 3.9 7-12 S3/S4 CwHw-Mat 5 to 25 S TL023 5 to 20 0.5 to 1.5 0-2 S2 CwHw-Imm (Dr vets) 6 (18) * All streams are considered to be fish bearing.

34 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

3.5. Cumulative Effects of the Access Road and the Transmission Line

All stream crossings along NE 62D flow into a tributary to the Nahwitti River. This tributary has a total stream channel length of approximately 21,400 m. There are four stream crossings that are currently considered to contain fish habitat and an additional two crossings that may contain fish habitat.

The potential impact on this tributary by the road, therefore, is approximately 60 to 90 m; 24 to 48 m of which will be related to the road prism (calculated based on a 15 m wide right-of-way and a 6 to 8 m wide road prism). The transmission line right-of-way is expected to be 45 m wide. However, since the transmission line will be constructed adjacent to the Nahwitti Forest Service Road, an impact width of 22.5 m has been used for this assessment. Consequently, the cumulative effect of both the access road and the transmission line on this tributary is a maximum of 112.5 m of stream length or 0.53 % of the total tributary length. The potential for a loss of riparian habitat (HAAD) was considered high at all transmission line stream crossings due to the presence of trees.

For the remaining 17 Nahwitti River tributaries that are crossed by the transmission line, the total length of riparian area affected by the transmission line right-of-way is 383 m (17 crossings multiplied by 22.5 m of stream length managed as a transmission line right-of-way). The total stream length of these 18 tributaries is 37,400 m. The 383 m of riparian length of the 17 tributaries represents 1.02 % of the total riparian length. The Nahwitti Forest Service road right- of-way adds an additional 1% (approximate) effect for a total cumulative effect of 2%.

When access road and transmission line effects are combined for all 18 tributaries, the total length affected by right-of-way and crossing structures is 496 m. The total length of the 18 tributaries is 58,800 m. Total percentage of riparian length of the 18 Nahwitti tributaries affected by the Knob Hill Wind Farm project is therefore 0.84%.

This small amount, plus the benefit of the compensatory work, will result in no significant cumulative effects resulting from the access road.

3.6. Additional Facilities

Three additional Project components that were not assessed in the field are:

1. Concrete batch plant; 2. Substation; and 3. Switching yard.

35 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

It is expected that the concrete batch plant will be located in Holberg and concrete trucked to the job site. The batch plant will be located in an area that will avoid encroachment into fish habitat. The batch plant will be a net user of water and will be operated as a closed system so there will be no discharge of effluent from the plant. All wash water will be recycled.

The substation is located with the Knob Hill Wind Farm (Plate 1). The switching yard is located at the junction of the Holberg and Nahwitti Forest Service Roads (Appendix 4). Both of these facilities will be located so that it does not encroach onto fish habitat.

Although no negative impacts to the fisheries resource are anticipated from these three project components, DFO staff will be consulted during the detailed design phase prior to finalization of the location and facility construction.

36 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

4. FISHERIES ACT APPROVAL

Sea Breeze recognizes that authorization under Subsection 35 (2) of the federal Fisheries Act will be required to address the Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction (HADD) of fish habitat prior to commencement of construction. This authorization will be required since the Project involves the construction of a number of stream crossings over streams that contain fish habitat, as well as the clearing of some riparian trees beneath the transmission line that crosses several tributaries to the Nahwitti River. As a result, development of the Knob Hill Wind Farm will result in some unavoidable HADDs of fish habitat. Under the Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat, authorization for a HADD of fish habitat normally includes the requirement to develop, implement, and monitor the success of fish habitat compensation works, as a condition of authorization.

4.1. Magnitude of Unavoidable Habitat Loss

The unavoidable loss of fish habitat productivity is considered to be relatively low since:

§ Most road crossings are on the upper reaches of small headwater streams located on top of Knob Hill where fish production in naturally low; § Road crossings will be designed in a manner that minimizes habitat loss and design standards will meet or exceed Forest and Range Act standards; § Riparian clearing beneath the transmission line will be minimized as much as possible; and § Long term road maintenance standards will be comprehensive and will be consistently implemented.

Consequently, the overall impact to the fisheries resource will be comparable to, or less than, a small logging operation.

4.2. Application of DFO Habitat Policies and Guidelines

DFO has several publications that deal with the management of fish and fish habitat. These are:

§ Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat (the “Habitat Policy”), Department of Fisheries and Oceans, 1986; § Habitat Conservation and Protection Guidelines (the “C&P Guidelines”), Department of Fisheries and Oceans, 1998; and § Decision Framework for the Determination of Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction of Fish Habitat, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, 1998.

37 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

The Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat (1986) describes a “Hierarchy of Preferences” and “Procedures” when applying the No Net Loss principle. The remaining two documents provide supporting information for decision making and application of the Habitat Policy.

Sea Breeze commits to developing the Knob Hill Wind Farm in a manner that is consistent with these policies and guidelines given the site-specific conditions within the Project Area.

Sea Breeze has held several meetings and on-site inspections with regional and local DFO staff and has a firm understanding of the scope of planning information and commitments that will be required to obtain a Subsection 35(2) approval.

Potential impacts to fish and fish habitat will be mitigated1 whenever practical and consistent with the Habitat Policy. However, it is anticipated that the creation of compensatory habitat will be required for some streams depending on site-specific conditions. Consequently, I recommend that Sea Breeze:

1. Avoid negative impacts to fish and fish habitat by alternative siting where ever it is practical to do so; 2. If alternative siting is not practical, minimize negative impacts by careful design and application of appropriate sediment control and other mitigation measures as appropriate during construction; 3. Commit to a monitoring program during construction that will include water quality (suspended sediment) measurements and contingency plans, and on-site inspections by an Environmental Monitor at construction sites that could potentially affect fish habitat; 4. Work with DFO to develop a compensation plan as a condition of Subsection 35 (2) authorization for unavoidable HADDs of fish habitat .Fish habitat compensation need to be designed and constructed in consultation with DFO staff on a site-by-site basis by considering such factors as degree of risk to the resource, expected success of replacement habitat, importance of habitat lost, habitat compensation rations, etc.; 5. Commit to a post-construction monitoring program for compensatory habitat; and 6. Commit to providing additional compensatory habitat if the original compensatory habitat fails.

The above items will be better identified during the detailed design phase of the project and implemented during construction of the Wind Farm.

1 For the purpose of this report, mitigation means to minimize effects and compensation means to provide replacement habitat or improve existing habitat to offset unavoidable losses.

38 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

5. GENERAL MITIGATION AND COMPENSATION STRATEGIES

Mitigation strategies to minimize any potential negative effects to the fisheries resource should be implemented during the detailed planning stages of the project, particularly during design of the roads, road stream crossings, and the transmission line right-of-way. The first step is to carefully select a route that will avoid areas containing fish habitat, or that have the potential to affect fish habitat. If an alternative route is not feasible then design options that could reduce the potential habitat loss should be thoroughly explored.

It is recommended that fish habitat be carefully monitored during the construction phase of the project. In addition, the fisheries resource should be protected for the life of the project by the implementation of regular monitoring and maintenance programs for the access road, service roads, and transmission line right-of-way.

Within-stream habitat (i.e. rearing and spawning areas) will be maintained by using open bottom crossing structures. It is likely that some sediment may unavoidably enter streams for short periods of time during construction, maintenance, and deactivation of roads. Water quality over the long term, however, will be maintained through a rigorous road inspection and maintenance program.

However, some unavoidable losses of fish habitat are expected to occur in spite of the application of various mitigation strategies. Consequently, some habitat compensation will be required to ensure no net loss of the productive capacity of fish habitat in the Project Area.

Impacts to fish habitat are expected to be almost entirely related to the removal of riparian vegetation within the right-of-ways at road and transmission line stream crossings. It is also possible, however, that some flood plain areas may be lost at some stream crossings within the Knob Hill Wind Farm. Flood plain areas will not be considered fish habitat unless a Fisheries Sensitive Zone is present (see Section 2.2)

It is concluded that compensation habitat should be designed to offset unavoidable losses of the productive capacity of fish habitat primarily due to:

1. The loss of riparian vegetation; and 2. Short term sedimentation to streams.

Compensation strategies are expected to have a high probability of long term success since most of the streams impacted are small in size and have a relatively low stream energy. The actual

39 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

compensation strategy will be finalized during the final design and permitting stage and will be based on site-specific conditions.

The cumulative effects on fish populations within the individual watersheds in the Wind Farm Area are expected to be minimal since the overall area affected by Project development is very small. In addition, most of the wind farm stream crossings are located on headwater tributaries where fish production is typically very low.

5.1. Instream Fisheries Timing Windows

Instream work in fish streams is typically limited to a certain time of the year depending on the fish species present. The instream timing windows for the Knob Hill Project Area are: § June 15 to August 15 for the Stranby and Nahwitti Rivers; and § June 15 to August 20 for the Goodspeed River.

However, in certain cases it may be necessary to construct stream crossings outside of the fisheries window due to logistical constraints. For example, the instream timing window may not be long enough to allow for the completion of a section of road if several stream crossings need to be constructed.

Based on discussions with DFO staff, the construction of stream crossings outside of the instream work window could be allowed depending on the site and providing certain conditions are met. Detailed plans describing the type of work proposed and the mitigation strategies that will be implemented would need to be prepared and provided to DFO and provincial fisheries staff for their approval. Although each crossing will be evaluated on a site-specific basis, below is a list of some of the conditions that may apply: 1. No work is conducted within the wetted channel (i.e. construction of a full span bottomless culvert with each abutment set back from the stream bank); 2. Isolate the work site with silt-proof fences and/or dams and work in-the-dry if possible; 3. Remove any fish that may be present in the work site prior to construction; 4. Prevent surface water from flowing into the work area by containing and pumping around the work area; 5. Treat (i.e. retention pond) any water containing high levels of suspended sediment prior to discharge out of the work area; 6. Monitor suspended sediment levels in surface waters upstream and downstream of the work site using a methodology approved by DFO and provincial fisheries staff; and 7. Provide an experienced Environmental Monitor to conduct site inspections as needed.

40 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Some examples of where work may be conducted outside of the instream fisheries timing window are:

§ A stream that is non fish-bearing but fish habitat is located in downstream reaches: In this example, suspended sediment would be controlled and retained at the work site (silt fences, etc.). Sediment control would be required since fish habitat is present downstream. May require isolating the work area and pumping water around the site. An example would be the stream crossings along the upper section of the Knob Hill access road (existing road NE 62- 1).

§ Fish habitat consisting of standing water with little or no flow (i.e. initial kilometre or so of NE 62D): There are several culverts that need to be installed along the access road where there are currently cross ditches (culverts were removed during road de-activation). The work site would be isolated from the surrounding habitat with silt-proof fences (i.e., sandbags, silt fences, etc.) and fish removed from the work area. Suspended sediment would be controlled by containment in the work area and by allowing it to settle prior to removal of the silt-proof fences. Water may need to be pumped around the work site depending on gradients and the natural flow patterns.

§ Stream crossings along the service roads within the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area: Stream crossing structures on these streams will generally consist of a full span with the abutments set back from the edge of the stream. Instream work can be avoided since both abutments will be constructed from one side of the stream. Equipment, therefore, does not need to ford the stream. Any offsite movement of suspended sediment that may be generated from the road prism or ditch line would be minimized through the application of standard mitigation techniques such as settling ponds.

Construction and mitigation strategies would be developed according to site-specific conditions and discussed with DFO staff early in the planning stage. In most, and possibly all, cases a qualified Environmental Monitor will need to conduct site inspections during and after construction. It is important to work with construction contractors, the Environmental Monitor, and the fisheries agency staff to develop a common understanding of the various issues.

In summary, with environmentally sound planning and construction techniques, along with an on- site Environmental Monitor, stream crossing construction can be accomplished outside of the traditional timing windows for a majority (maybe even all) of the stream crossings in the Knob Hill Project Area.

5.2. Non fish-bearing Stream Reaches

The primary objective of mitigation strategies adjacent to, and within, non fish-bearing streams will be to maintain the quality and quantity of water in downstream reaches that are fish bearing.

41 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

If a non fish-bearing reach is judged to be providing a significant source of food and nutrients to fish habitat located downstream then the riparian zone of this reach will be classified as fish habitat during the detailed planning phase. For these reaches, therefore, the amount and quality of riparian forest lost will be described and a compensation strategy will be designed and implemented.

Crossings on non fish-bearing stream reaches that are not classified as fish habitat will generally consist of a corrugated metal pipe (“CMP”). The culvert size will be designed and constructed in a manner consistent with the Forest Practices Code as outlined in the Forest Road Engineering Guidebook. Downstream water quality will be maintained by the appropriate use of water management and erosion control techniques.

Road ditches will be designed and constructed so that sediment delivery to non fish-bearing stream reaches is minimized. The final design will depend on site-specific conditions. Potential mitigation strategies to minimize sediment delivery to non fish-bearing stream reaches include:

§ Diverting ditch water to low-lying upland areas instead of discharging directly into a stream; § Constructing sediment catch basins in the ditch line; § frequent cross drainage culverts; § Lining erodable ditches at strategic locations with non-erodable material such as gravel or cobbles in critical areas; § Inspections during the construction phase by an Environmental Monitor; § Rain shutdown criteria applied during construction; and § A long term road inspection and maintenance program.

5.3. Fish Bearing Reaches with no HADD

Crossings on fish bearing stream reaches where there is no loss, disruption, or harmful alteration of fish habitat will be designed, constructed, and maintained in a manner consistent with the Forest Practices Code as outlined in Fish-stream Crossing Guidebook (i.e., open bottom structures).

For those streams that are fish bearing at the road crossing location, an open bottom structure (OBS) such as an open bottom log culvert will be recommended. Stream crossings where no HADD is anticipated include sites where the crossing structure does not encroach onto the flood plain, the stream channel is completely spanned, and no riparian vegetation is lost. In addition, critical fish habitat is not present.

Road drainage and potential mitigation strategies will be designed and implemented in a manner similar to, or more stringent than, those of non fish-bearing stream reaches.

42 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

5.4. Fish Bearing Reaches Where a HADD Cannot be Avoided

Crossings where there is an unavoidable loss of the productive capacity of fish habitat will be designed in a manner that firstly reduces this loss. Secondly, a proposal will be prepared that includes the creation of new fish habitat and/or the enhancement of existing fish habitat. The goal will be to:

1. Achieve a No Net Loss of productive capacity at a minimum; and 2. Strive towards a net gain in productive capacity.

An example of an unavoidable HADD may be a crossing site where seven riparian trees are lost due to road fill and there is no alternative crossing location. In this example, the road fill is designed and constructed in a way that minimizes the loss of riparian vegetation. An additional mitigation strategy would be to create grow sites where trees can be replanted. Depending on the size of the riparian trees at the crossing site, an excavator may be able to transplant them to the newly created grow sites. In addition to this, a small off-channel pond may be excavated adjacent to the road if there is no more potential for the creation of additional riparian habitat.

Potential mitigation options include:

§ Implementing strategies to minimize sediment delivery to streams as described for non fish- bearing stream reaches; § Planting trees within the riparian area if suitable planting sites exist; § Creating suitable planting areas within the riparian area so that trees can be planted; § Creating off-channel pond habitat; and § Creating instream cover such as deep pools, boulder clusters, and large woody debris placements.

43 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

6. MITIGATION STRATEGIES RELATED TO EACH OF THE THREE PROJECT COMPONENTS

Below is a summary of potential2 effect each project component could have on the fisheries resource followed by a description of some possible impact mitigation and compensation strategies.

6.1. Knob Hill Service Roads

Wind farm development will include the construction of approximately 83 km of turbine tower service roads with 37 stream crossings identified in the initial planning phase. Based on visual observations made during the stream crossing assessment, it appears that salmonids utilize a number of streams within the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area. These service roads could potentially affect fish and fish habitat by the:

§ Loss of flood plain habitat (areas of the flood plain utilized by fish during peak flows); § Direct loss of fish habitat at crossing sites; § Sedimentation of fish habitat during construction; § Sedimentation during operation, maintenance, and deactivation; § Alteration of natural drainage patterns; and § Loss of riparian vegetation at the stream crossings.

Most of these potential impacts can be effectively minimized with standard mitigation techniques. It is anticipated that any potential impacts to fish and fish habitat will be easy to avoid since:

1. Most streams are small (average channel width for 33 crossings is 1.3 m) and relatively flat (average channel gradient is 5%); 2. Stream power is low; 3. The crossing at most sites can be moved slightly upstream or downstream to avoid sensitive habitats; 4. Topography is relatively uniform; 5. Stream crossing costs will be low to moderate at almost all sites allowing for greater flexibility.

The exceptions are the loss of riparian vegetation at stream crossings and short term sedimentation during and immediately after road construction.

2 These impacts represent a list of potential impacts. It is anticipated that most will be avoided and the remaining impacts will be compensated for.

44 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

It is currently anticipated that the road width (including ditches) in the wind farm site will be eight (8) metres at stream crossings. The minimum area of riparian vegetation that would be affected, therefore, is eight metres multiplied by the width of the riparian habitat on each side of the stream channel. This area could be slightly more if some additional trees need to be removed to provide additional swing room for the excavator during crossing installation.

The riparian areas of six stream crossings consist of grasses (see Table 5, Section 3.1). No compensation related to riparian vegetation loss is proposed for these crossings.

Thirteen crossings have riparian areas dominated by a mix of grasses and shrubs. Several of these crossings are predominantly grasses with a few scattered shrub-sized conifers. The loss of these shrubs is considered to be a minor reduction of productive capacity of fish habitat since leaf litter drop, insect drop, and overhead cover at these sites is minimal.

Any loss of riparian vegetation in these areas will be compensated for on a site-specific basis, and the amount of compensation will vary depending on the site. It is anticipated that all shrubs and trees will be maintained within the service road right-of-ways whenever possible and that only those shrubs present on the actual road footprint will require removal. In some areas it may be possible to maintain low-lying shrubs within the crossing structure when a bottomless crossing design is used.

The loss of riparian trees at the remaining 18 crossing sites will require some form of compensation depending on the site-specific conditions. However, it is anticipated that compensation options to create additional riparian forest will be very limited within the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area. This area has never been logged and streamside areas that can support tree growth already contain trees. Trees planted in grass-dominated riparian areas would probably not survive since conditions are not amenable to tree growth.

However, it may be possible to plant replacement trees within treeless riparian areas that are adjacent to stream crossings if grow sites are created. This can be accomplished by creating a grow site, perhaps by constructing a raised earthen bed contained by shot rock adjacent to the stream. A vegetation expert would need to be consulted during the detailed design phase if this strategy was implemented.

Additional compensation options for lost riparian vegetation will likely involve fish habitat improvement within the channel, or possibly the creation of some small off-channel ponds. Compensation works will be conducted in the same tributary watershed as the loss occurs if at all possible. Compensation activities that require the use of heavy equipment will likely be done close enough to the road prism so that the equipment can remain on the road to avoid additional site disturbance. Compensation habitat constructed by hand can be done further from the road, but boardwalks may be required to preserve the native vegetation and reduce soil disturbance.

Potential compensation strategies include:

45 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

1. Placing boulder clusters in the channel; 2. Placing LWD in the channel; 3. Excavating self-scouring pool habitat in the channel (a stepped structure placed at the upstream end of the pool so the pool will be maintained by scouring action); 4. Excavating off-channel ponds; and 5. Planting native shrubs and trees in the road fill and/or adjacent to the stream.

6.2. Knob Hill Access Road

The preferred route to develop an access road to the Knob Hill Wind Farm is described in Section 4.2 (see Plate 1). This route is comprised of approximately 9.5 km of logging road as measured from the Holberg mainline road. All but 0.9 km of this route is currently existing logging road, 3.6 km of which has been deactivated.

The first 5.0 km of road is currently active logging road and very little work will be required by Sea Breeze in order to utilize this road. Proposed work on this section of the access road will consist of one bridge replacement and some right-of-way clearing. The next 1.6 km of road has been deactivated and although the roadbed is in place, several culverts will need to be re- installed. The next 300 or so metres will be new road construction with a large culvert or bridge over a potential fish-bearing creek required. The final 2.5 km of access road consists of 2.0 km of deactivated road requiring a number of culvert re-installations and the construction of 575 m of new road with no stream crossings planned.

The access road could potentially affect fish and fish habitat by:

§ Loss of a riparian vegetation or riparian potential; § Possible sedimentation of fish habitat located downstream of the access road; and § Short term sedimentation during maintenance or deactivation of the road.

Unlike the stream crossings within the Knob Hill Wind Farm, impacts to the riparian vegetation are mostly related to the potential for riparian vegetation since most of the stream crossings along the access road have already had the vegetation removed. There are two exceptions; these are:

1. Re-construction of the bridge at 2.66 km of NE 62; and 2. Construction of a new crossing on Stream A, Road Section 5 (Plate 1).

It is anticipated that only a few trees will have to be removed at km 2.66 of NE 62 in order to replace the existing bridge. Riparian trees, however, will have to be removed at the new crossing on Road Section 4. All other potential impacts to the productive capacity of fish habitat will be related to sedimentation.

46 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Compensation options for the possible loss of riparian trees at km 2.66 of NE 62 are limited. The stream at this location is wide enough (approximately 8 to 10 m) so that any instream compensation works would have a high risk of failure during peak flows. Consequently, the most feasible option is to provide additional compensation in the streams along NE 62D. However, since these streams are in a completely different watershed (Nahwitti as opposed to the Goodspeed) is may be desirable to conduct a conifer release program at the 2.66 km bridge replacement site. Falling alder trees within the riparian zone at this location will help to promote a more rapid recovery of the natural climax stand structure by enhancing the growth of the existing conifer understory.

Compensation options for the streams along NE 62D include the instream works described for the Knob Hill access road. In particular, the stream crossings along Road Section 1 (Photo 10) could be enhanced by digging pools, placing LWD, etc., so that they no longer resemble a ditch with no habitat complexity. Instream enhancement will be conducted for distances equal to, or greater than, the length of stream affected by the road.

Photo 10 Crossing Site 1 on NE 62D Road Section 2

The loss of riparian trees at the new crossing location on Road Section 4 can be compensated for by re-establishing riparian trees at the deactivated crossing site on road NE 62D-1, located approximately 140 m downstream. The crossing structure at this location was removed during road deactivation and there currently is no vegetation on either side of the stream (Photo 10). This section of the stream with no riparian vegetation is considerably longer than the width of the

47 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area road right-of-way will be at the proposed crossing location allowing for a greater than 1:1 replacement ration.

Consideration was given to removing the sediment wedge located approximately 100 m downstream of NE 62D-1. This wedge is preventing the upstream movement of fish and removal would allow fish to move further up this stream. However, re-establishing fish access would involve a major excavation with heavy equipment and there is a high probability a large amount of sediment would move downstream and deposit in the mainstem of the Nahwitti tributary (Plate 1).

The mainstem channel of this tributary is already severely aggraded and additional sedimentation would result in a negative impact to the fisheries resource. It is therefore recommended that the sediment wedge be left as is and other compensation options be explored.

As with the wind farm service roads, potential impacts due to sedimentation will be mitigated by sediment and drainage control strategies described in Sections 6.0 and 7.0 of this report.

6.3. Transmission Line Development

Development of the transmission line could potentially affect fish and fish habitat by the removal of trees within the riparian zones of fish bearing streams during right-of-way preparation and maintenance.

Mitigation strategies to minimize any negative effects to the fisheries resource from transmission line development include:

1. Placing power poles outside of the riparian areas of any body of water that contains fish habitat; 2. Using extra tall towers adjacent to fish habitat; and 3. Retaining as much of the vegetation within the riparian areas as is possible.

The transmission line route is approximately 11.2 km from the boundary of the Wind Farm Area to the switching yard. The results for the reconnaissance level assessment conducted by GeoWise Engineering (2004) indicate that the transmission line route, as currently planned, crosses 19 streams that are tributaries to the Nahwitti River. Two of these streams were deemed to be non fish-bearing since both were ephemeral and the channel widths were less than 0.4 m wide. A more detailed fisheries assessment of the tributary streams affected by the transmission line will be conducted during the detailed design phase to determine fish bearing status. For the purposes of this assessment, however, all stream crossings will be considered fish habitat.

48 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

The width of the transmission line ROW is currently planned at 45 m. It is anticipated that since the transmission line will be constructed as close to the Nahwitti Forest Service Road as possible, that the actual amount of riparian trees affected will be significantly less than 45 m since the FSR right-of-way will form part of the transmission line right-of-way. For the purposes of this assess, however, a full width of 45 m will be assumed when calculating the potential cumulative effects of the riparian tree loss.

There are several compensation options that can be applied to streams affected by the power line right-of-way. Potential strategies include:

§ Some form of conifer release treatment within the riparian zone (i.e. girdling alders); § Development of off-channel habitat; and § Placement of LWD (i.e. rootwads, logs, etc.) in fish streams where appropriate and cost effective. There may be some interesting opportunities for LWD placement since a large helicopter and/or crane will be in the area during Project construction.

These compensation options and the actual treatment will be finalized based on site-specific conditions during the final design of the Project.

49 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

7. MONITORING

It is recommended that a monitoring plan be designed based on the actual mitigation and compensation works that may be constructed. It is anticipated that any instream habitat improvements and/or habitat construction that are intended to mitigate a HADD should be monitored.

It is recommended that monitoring be done:

1) During construction (construction monitoring); and 2) After construction (post-construction effectiveness monitoring).

7.1. Construction Monitoring

Construction monitoring should be conducted to ensure that each crossing structure is built as specified in the design and approval documents. In addition, a qualified Environmental Monitor and/or biologist should be on-site at strategic stages of construction to ensure that mitigation/compensation strategies are implemented as planned. Consequently, it is recommended that an Environmental Monitor conduct field inspections during instream construction and that that person be qualified to make on-the-spot changes to the mitigation/compensation plan as field conditions dictate. Significant changes to approved plans should be immediately reviewed by Sea Breeze staff and consultants and discussed with fisheries agency staff as soon as possible.

7.2. Post-Construction Effectiveness Monitoring

In order to assess effectiveness of the mitigation and compensation works, it is recommended that habitat parameters be measured after construction and compared to the pre-construction habitat data that were collected during the detailed design phase of the Project. A comprehensive photographic record of fish habitat characteristics should also be established before, during, and after construction.

It is recommended that post-construction effectiveness monitoring be conducted for at least one winter of stream flows after construction to ensure that the mitigation/compensation habitat is functioning as designed. A record of the physical habitat parameters, backed up with photographs, should be taken during each field inspection. This information, along with professional judgement and the pre-construction information will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation strategies and compensation habitat.

50 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

A monitoring program should be designed in consultation with DFO and provincial fisheries agency staff. The scope of the monitoring program will depend on the type of mitigation and compensation work that was completed. Fish sampling may be conducted depending on site- specific conditions.

The post-construction monitoring results will be used to determine if follow-up work is required. If the mitigation habitat is fully functioning and is stable, follow-up work will likely not be recommended. It is expected that follow-up compensation work will be required if mitigation/compensation efforts have failed, or partially failed. In this case, follow-up work may include additional instream construction and/or repairs as well as another year of post- construction monitoring.

7.3. Monitoring of Suspended Sediment

As has been stated previously in this report, suspended sediment generated during project development could potentially have a negative impact on the fisheries resource. Although an emphasis will be placed on the minimization and containment of suspended sediment, it is possible that some suspended sediment could enter fish habitat.

After consultations with DFO staff, I recommend that an Enviroscopics Visual Clarity Wedge be used. This device is reliable, inexpensive, and easy to use. Since the clarity wedge measures Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU), a correlation between NTUs and total suspended sediment (TSS) should be established for streams within the project area. It is recommended that at least two separate correlations be established, one for the Wind Farm Area and the second for the access road and the transmission line route. This is desirable due to the large differences in soil conditions between the top of Knob Hill and the better drained slopes.

Once a correlation between NTUs and TSS is established, the Clarity Wedge can be quickly used by the Environmental Monitor, or even construction staff, to monitor suspended sediment during and after construction.

It is recommended that a protocol for both the construction and the post-construction monitoring be developed in consultation with DFO and provincial fisheries staff. The protocol can define what levels of suspended sediment are acceptable, for how long a discharge is allowed, the number of readings required, and where the sampling should take place. It is anticipated that suspended sediment amounts will be evaluated downstream of the work area in selected non fish- bearing reaches to determine travel distance if fish habitat is located in downstream reaches.

51 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

8. REFERENCES

B.C. Ministry of Forests. 1998. Fish Stream Identification Guidebook. 2nd Edition, Version 2.1 Forest Practices Code Guidebook. Victoria, B.C.: Forest Practices Branch, MOF. URL:http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/legsregs/fpc/FPCGUIDE/FISH/FishStream.pdf

B.C. Ministry of Forests. 2002. Forest Road Engineering Guidebook. 2nd Edition. Forest Practices Code Guidebook. Victoria, B.C.: Forest Practices Branch, MOF. June 2002. URL:http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/legsregs/fpc/FPCGUIDE/Road/FRE.pdf

B.C. Ministry of Forests. December, 1995. Riparian Management Area Guidebook. Victoria, B.C.: Forest Practices Branch, MOF. URL:http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/legsregs/fpc/fpcguide/riparian/rip-toc.htm

B.C. Ministry of Forests. March, 2002. Fish Stream Crossing Guidebook. Forest Practices Code Guidebook. Victoria, B.C.: Forest Practices Branch, MOF. URL:http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/tasb/legsregs/fpc/fpcguide/FishStreamCrossing/FSCGdBk.pdf

B.C. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. 1992. BC Guidelines for Industry Emergency Response Plans. Victoria, B.C.: MWLAP. URL:http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/eeeb/indusguide/industcplan.html

Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 1998. Decision Framework for the Determination of Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction of Fish Habitat. Ottawa, Ontario: Habitat Management Branch, Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 1985. Fisheries Act ( R.S. 1985, c. F-14 ) URL:http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F-14/index.html

Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 1986. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat. Ottawa, Ontario: Fish Habitat Management Branch, Department of Fisheries and Oceans URL:http://www-heb.pac.dfo- mpo.gc.ca/publications/pdf/policy_for_mgmt_fish_e.pdf

Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 1998. Habitat Conservation and Protection Guidelines. Communications Directorate, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa, Ontario URL:http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/canwaters-eauxcan/infocentre/guidelines- conseils/guides/fhmguide/index_e.asp

Fisheries Information Summary System (FISS) Database. Supporting documenation through URL:http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/aquatic/fiss/index.htm. Access through the web-based

52 Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Project Area

Fish Wizard at URL:http://www.fishwizard.com/ and the Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management Aquatic Information Branch at http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/aib/

Fishfor Contracting. 1999. Memo to Western Forest Products Ltd. Port McNeill, BC

Forest and Range Practices Act, S.B.C. 2002, c. 69 (not in force). Royal Assent: November 21, 2002. URL: http://www.legis.gov.bc.ca/37th3rd/3rd_read/gov74-3.htm

Field Data Information System (FDIS) Database. Program developed by Aquatic Information Branch, Fisheries Information, Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management, Province of British Columbia, Victoria, BC URL:http://www.bcfisheries.gov.bc.ca/fishinv/fdis.html

Reid, George. Senior Fish Biologist, VIFISH, Fish and Wildlife Science and Allocation Section, Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Province of British Columbia. Nanaimo, BC

Resources Information Standards Committee (RISC). 1997. Fish Collection Methods and Standards, Version 4.0. , Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management, Province of British Columbia. Victoria, B.C. URL:http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/aquatic/fishcol/assets/fishml04.pdf

Resources Information Standards Committee (RISC). 2001. Reconnaissance (1:20,000) Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory Standards. Version 2.0. Prepared by the BC Fisheries Information Services Branch for the Resources Inventory Committee, for the Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management, Province of British Columbia. Victoria, B.C. URL:http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/aquatic/recon/recce2c.pdf

Resources Information Standards Committee (RISC). 1998 Site Cards. Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management, Province of British Columbia. Victoria, B.C. URL:http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/aquatic/scf.pdf and URL:http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/aquatic/scb.pdf

53 2 0-969500-07600-21600 0 0 3 103 2 920-969500-07600-21600 1030

1046 10482 1 G 1029 1048 920-969500-07600 4 -21600-5620 920-953700-0620 568000 mE 565000 mE 566000 mE 567000 mE 569000 mE B 570000 mE 571000 mE 572000 mE 573000 mE 574000 mE 575000 mE 576000 mE 577000 mE o 578000 mE 579000 mE 580000 mE -5620-6750 5 3 U 13 920-969500 1 -07600 -5620-6750 13 r d 12 1 1047 ! L 2 1029 5 T 1047 1 6 4 k 920-969500-07600 a -953700-06200 1 11 -10700 -5600 1 1 14 1 3 920-969500-07600-56300 y 920-969500-07600-56300 14 10201020 i 2 1 7 1036

g -06200-56300 920-953700 2 4 1 3 10 1024 1036 l 5 1005 1 n 5627000 mN 1003 920-969500-07600-21600-5620 1005 2 5 5627000 mN 8 1 1021 1052 1024 g 5007 3 1 l 2 1003 5007 1 2 6 10551055 1021 1006 1031 2 7 1 1037 4 06200-10700 3 1006 1 -6650 1 9 2 1 -16200-10700-5750-1910 1037 2 2 -21600-8560 920-953700-06200-56300 920-969500 4 920-953700-28100 i 1 5 920-953700-28100 10541054 -07600-7500 -21600 1050 15 -85603 920-969500-07600-7500 1 1 3 1 1050 15 1038 1 2 1 1004 1038 2 1056 1 1004 2 2 1 -06200- 2 3 6 10700- 1027 1 2 16 5750- -06200-10700-6650 5008 1 a 2 1 1910 3 1 8 2 920-953700-06200 1053 1 1 2 1 k C 920-969500 2 5008 10 7 -07600-76000 2 1 e e 2 & 1 SC-024 r 2 & 1051 1053 -56300-1670 1 2 5 C 1032 r 3 2 1051 SC-022 4 g -56300-1670 & 2 1032 5626000 mN g 8 5626000 mN

a 920-953700 3 -06200 SC-011 r & e SC-021 2 SC-010 5013 2 & B 1025 & 2 (00303NEVI)3 3 1033 3 16 C 1025 1028 1033 SC-020 1034 3 4 SC-019& 1034 e

4 -21600-9820 3 7& 1 1035 17 1000 2

1 2 SC-012 1022 1028 5 1 1039 & &SC-023 C 920-9537009 3 SC-008 1 -18400

r 1035 & 1039 00-123000 N 1000 &-21600-9820 1023 1 2 k 18 1007 SC-007 5011 4 1 1023 1 & 5011 10 17 4 1007 1 e 5 -07600-84400-0330 6 1 R r -07600-84400 4 3 11 1 -0330 2 2 a 3 1 5 1 e 1057 18 1057 n r 1009 1026 19 4 1058 1 2 5625000 mN 9 4 3 5625000 mN e 1 1009 1058 n Godkin 10 1040 A 1 & 5 k 1 1041 2 9 920-953700 11 5 e 920-953700-06200-10700-5750 1026 4 920-969500 1040 1041 2 -06200 5009 Stream A -07600-21600 00364 -10700 5 1 5014 l ke 1 NEVI 1 La U 920-969500-07600-21600-89702 -8970 -5750 6 2 e -40000 l SC-037 SC-016 5005 1045 & -36800 5014 7 1001 1010 & 5 5005 2 1 1 920-969500-07600 1010 1008 & 1001 19 4 1008 6 2 12 Ω1-3 -8530 1 10 KNOB 20 2 2 6 3 1 13 20 k Ω1-2 7 11 Ω1-1 -07600-91500 3 1011 2 2 Ω 3 & 1042 -06200-87100 Ω ΩA-1 1011 H C NE62D-8B A-3 A-2 HILL 07600-91500 6 1 1 7 -06200-87100 1043 8 1063 1 -10700-9280 & 14 4 r 4 -10700-9290 &SC-005 4 1063 Ω 8-5 2 -10700-9280 Substation e -10700-9290 12 Ω 8-4 1 SC-013 1061 5015 1 & 2 3 e 8 -07600-84400 & 1043 8-3 Ω

9 1 Ω 11 -07600-84400-6700 21 1 1 2 5624000 mN 5 -6700 1044 5624000 mN 21 5 k 3 2 2 11064 1062 Ω 8-2 22 1 Ω7 -07600 2 1044 1062 8-1 7 1 1 Ω -84400 1 23 -07600-84400 8 1 -61900-83300 2 15 W 6 22 V E R N C O U NE62D-8 00423NEVI 1064 V A ut 4 Nahsh -61900-83300 2 2 Beaver Ponds 3 Ω56 2 Ω 5003 1 13 -40000 Lak 5003 1002 4 9 -36800 1015 2 6 4 1015 10 1065 Ω 1 1002 1065 -61900-33100 2 16 R annell Ωn/a & 8 5 5 5016 e -61900-33100 7 17 Lak 3 7 SC-004 Ω 5 & 31018 3 1 2 1018 SC-027 1059 6 Ω & & TL002 00454 17 5 1 & I

-40000-82000 6 1059 NEVI 18 00453 SC-036 4 2 6 &

19 NEVI -40000-

1 SC-002 5623000 mN 20 & 5623000 mN -61900-33100-5400 16 82000 -40000-80100 TL003 NE62D SC-028 7 1 & Ω1 & & 3 920-953700-40000 SC-030 k 1 3 SC-034 TL004 & -61900-33100-5400 5004 & -40000 & 4 2 1060 1-80100 TL005TL006 i SC-026930-894800 2 1 -83300-1440 & 3 1060 1 && 5004 SC-031 1 -83300-1440 -49800-77600 & & 3 15 2 TL008 2 & e 2 t 5 920-953700-40000 14 1 3 2 TL009 T

2 & t N 4 e a u 930-8948000-49800-77600 h s h 13 2

920-969500 -61900-52700

1 1017 NE62 2 920-969500-61900-33100 1017 3 -67700 920-969500 r -7710

2 -61900-33100 -61900-7850 -67700-7710 1 T 5622000 mN 2 12 1 5622000 mN -61900 -78500 1 4

2 -61900-78500-3000 -49300-67702 C SC-029 3 -49300 &3 -67700 5

-61900-78500 -3000

920-969500-61900-52700

11

I N D I S L A 920-969500-61900 1

10 u 1

1

9 1 920-969500-61900 P

8 1 1 -49300-56400-7140 2 2.66 km Bridge -49300-56400-7140 2 1 -56400-59700 Replacement

5621000 mN 5621000 mN 000 mE 000 mE

1016 4 2 3 &TL012 3 -56400-59700

1

3 Ω Fish Data Point 3 1014 R I

1014 2 2 Stream Break 1 &TL013 -61900-66600 & Stream Crossing TL014 V & TL015TL016 4 2 && 3 5 TL018 Transmission Line 6 TL017 & -61900-66600 & Ω1-3 Substation, Switch Yard 930-894800 Ω1-2 -49300-56400 Ω1-1 &TL019 1 A-3A-2 Access Route 1 A-1 -61900-59900 1 1013 ΩΩΩ

-61900-59900 Main and Forest Road 1013 4 2 Ω 8-5 Knob Hill Wind Farm 8-4 5620000 mN Ω E &TL020 5620000 mN Lake 8-3 Ω8 7 Ω Region 5 10122 Ω 8-2 Contour w Elevation (Meter) & Ω7 &TL021 6 Ω 8-1 5 Knob Hill Turbine Roads &TL022 by Road Type 3 ΩΩ56 Primary Primary Single Lane Ω4 R Secondary 1012 n/a 930-894800-49390-2470 Ω

Ω3 4 Ω2

5619000 mN 4 5619000 mN Ω1

I

3 930-894800 k &TL023 -49300-24700 e V e

2

1 Sea Breeze Energy Inc. r

C E Reconnaissance Level Fish Habitat Assessment 5618000 mN 5618000 mN Date:17/01/2004 of the Knob Hill Wind Farm Area R Author: J Moore Switch North Vancouver Island Yard Office: Vancouver r NTS 102I 080 & 92L 071 e Drawing: Plate 1 l Scale: 1:20000 Projection: UTM Zone 9 (NAD 83) p

e

H 0 250500 1000

metres

5617000 mN 565000 mE 566000 mE 567000 mE 568000 mE 569000 mE 570000 mE 571000 mE 572000 mE 573000 mE 574000 mE 575000 mE 576000 mE 577000 mE 578000 mE 579000 mE 5617000 mN580000 mE