North Saskatchewan River Drainage, Fish Sustainability Index Data Gaps Project, 2017

Chad Judd, Mike Rodtka, and Zachary Spence Alberta Conservation Association 101 – 9 Chippewa Road Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada T8A 6J7

Report Editors

PETER AKU GLENDA SAMUELSON Alberta Conservation Association R.R. #2 101 – 9 Chippewa Rd. Craven, SK S0G 0W0 Sherwood Park, AB T8A 6J7

Conservation Report Series Type Data

ISBN: 978-0-9959984-2-1

Reproduction and Availability: This report and its contents may be reproduced in whole, or in part, provided that this title page is included with such reproduction and/or appropriate acknowledgements are provided to the authors and sponsors of this project.

Suggested Citation: Judd, C., M. Rodtka, and Z. Spence. 2018. North Saskatchewan River drainage, fish sustainability index data gaps project, 2017. Data Report, produced by Alberta Conservation Association, Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada. 18 pp + App.

Cover photo credit: David Fairless

Digital copies of conservation reports can be obtained from: Alberta Conservation Association 101 – 9 Chippewa Rd. Sherwood Park, AB T8A 6J7 Toll Free: 1-877-969-9091 Tel: (780) 410-1998 Fax: (780) 464-0990 Email: [email protected] Website: www.ab-conservation.com

i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Fishery inventories provide resource managers with information on fish species abundance, distribution, and habitat. This information is a key component of responsible land use planning. Alberta Environment and Park’s (AEP) Fish Sustainability Index (FSI), is a standardized process of assessment that provides the framework within which fishery inventories must occur for greatest relevance to government managers and planners. Our objective was to describe bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) and mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni) distribution and abundance in the headwaters of the North Saskatchewan River watershed to address data deficiencies for these FSI priority species. Bull trout are particularly sensitive to habitat change and are classed as Threatened in Alberta (Saskatchewan and Nelson rivers populations).

Priority areas for fishery inventories in 2017 were identified in consultation with project partners and included the Blackstone River, its tributaries and tributaries of the Brazeau River. From July 7 to August 24, we sampled 52 sites randomly distributed throughout six watersheds classed as hydrologic unit code (HUC) 10. West Fraser Mills Ltd’s forest management area encompasses at least portions of four of the six watersheds and 26 of the 52 sites. Sites were sampled using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear. We captured 308 bull trout, and 235 mountain whitefish. Bull trout were detected in all the HUC 10 watersheds and at 33 of the 52 sites. The Thistle Creek watershed had the highest relative abundance of bull trout at 5.68 bull trout per 100 m, while the Devil Forks watershed had the lowest, at 0.42 bull trout per 100 m. Mountain whitefish were detected in all watersheds except Chungo Creek and Thistle Creek. Brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and cutthroat trout (Onchorynchus clarkii) were detected in all watersheds, except Thistle Creek and Devil Forks, respectively. We measured stream temperature (hourly) at 13 stations in the HUC 10 watersheds to assess thermal suitability for bull trout habitat. Results indicated that highly suitable thermal habitat for bull trout existed in the Thistle Creek and upper Blackstone River watersheds in the summer months of 2017. Our study provides current information on stream habitats, and the abundance and distribution of FSI priority species within the Blackstone River, its tributaries and tributaries of the Brazeau River. This information is useful to land managers when attempting to balance the diverse values of the landbase upon which they operate and critical for the conservation of native fish species particularly sensitive to habitat degradation including bull trout. Key words: Alberta, North Saskatchewan River watershed, FSI, bull trout, mountain whitefish, distribution, abundance.

ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank Jessica Reilly and Steve Herman of Alberta Environment and Parks for their assistance with project design and development. Alberta Conservation Association employees Andrew Clough and Bryce O’Connor assisted with data collection and summary. The financial support of Hinton Wood Products, a division of West Fraser Mills Ltd., is greatly appreciated as is employee Laura Trout’s assistance with funding and study design considerations.

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... iv LIST OF FIGURES ...... v LIST OF TABLES ...... vi LIST OF APPENDICES ...... vii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 STUDY AREA ...... 2 3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS ...... 5 3.1 Fish distribution and abundance ...... 5 3.2 Stream habitat measurement ...... 6 4.0 RESULTS ...... 9 4.1 Fish distribution and abundance ...... 9 4.2 Stream habitat measurement ...... 13 5.0 SUMMARY ...... 15 6.0 LITERATURE CITED ...... 17 7.0 APPENDICES ...... 19

iv LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Map of the headwaters of the North Saskatchewan River watershed and the fishery inventory watersheds, 2017. Inset map shows the location within the province of Alberta...... 3 Figure 2. Map of the HUC 10 watersheds showing the location of backpack and tote-barge electrofishing sites, 2017...... 4 Figure 3. Map of the HUC 10 watersheds showing the location of stream temperature stations in each watershed and the Blackstone River, 2017...... 8 Figure 4. Map of the HUC 10 watersheds showing the distribution of fish species captured using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear, July 7 to August 24, 2017. .... 10

v LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Number of sites where fish were detected in each HUC 10 watershed and total catch of fish species using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear, July 7 to August 24, 2017...... 11 Table 2. Relative abundance of bull trout and mountain whitefish in each HUC 10 watershed using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear, July 7 to August 24, 2017...... 11 Table 3. Size distribution of fish species captured in each HUC 10 watershed using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear, July 7 to August 24, 2017...... 12 Table 4. Summary of stream habitat measurements in each HUC 10 watershed collected while backpack and tote-barge electrofish sampling, July 7 to August 24, 2017. . 14 Table 5. Summary of stream temperature measurements from 13 stations in the Blackstone and Brazeau watersheds, July 1 to August 31, 2017...... 15

vi LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Summary of backpack and tote-barge electrofishing site locations (NAD 83, Zone 11) and fish capture by species in the Upper Blackstone River (BS, BL = tote sites), Brown Creek (B), Chungo Creek (C), Devil Forks (DF), Thistle Creek (T), and Wapiabi Creek (W) watersheds, 2017...... 19 Appendix 2. Bootstrapped mean relative abundance (10,000 replicates) of fish captured in each HUC 10 watershed, using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear, 2017. .... 22 Appendix 3. Length frequency histograms of bull trout, mountain whitefish, cutthroat trout, and brook trout, captured using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear in the North Saskatchewan River watershed, 2017...... 23 Appendix 4. Length frequency histograms of bull trout and cutthroat trout captured using angling gear in the Blackstone River, 2017...... 25 Appendix 5. Stream hydrographs for Brown Creek and Brazeau River generated by Alberta Environment and Parks stream gauging stations, April to October, 2017...... 26 Appendix 6. Summary of habitat measurements at backpack and tote-barge electrofishing sites in the Upper Blackstone River (BS, BL = tote sites), Brown Creek (B), Chungo Creek (C), Devil Forks (DF), Thistle Creek (T), and Wapiabi Creek (W) watersheds, 2017...... 27 Appendix 7. Two-day moving average stream temperature at 13 stations in the Blackstone River, Brown Creek, Chungo Creek, Devil Forks, Thistle Creek, and Wapiabi Creek watersheds, 2017...... 30

vii 1.0 INTRODUCTION

The FSI evaluates fish species on four groups of metrics: population integrity, population productivity, threats, and data reliability (MacPherson et al. 2014). Fishery inventory data are particularly suited to evaluation of the population integrity (adult and immature density) and productive potential (geographic extent) metrics. When conducting fishery inventories in Alberta, watersheds are scaled using a hydrological unit code (HUC), appropriate for the focal fish species, with HUC 2 being the coarsest level and HUC 10 being the finest level.

Priority species, as identified by AEP, for FSI assessment that are known to occur in the headwaters of the North Saskatchewan River watershed include bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) and mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni) (MacPherson et al. 2014). Mountain whitefish are classed as Secure in Alberta (Government of Alberta 2017) whereas bull trout are classed as Threatened (Saskatchewan – Nelson rivers populations) (COSEWIC 2012). Bull trout are particularly sensitive to habitat change and are thought to reflect general ecosystem health (COSEWIC 2012). This sensitivity, coupled with their relatively wide distribution, make bull trout a suitable species for monitoring sustainability in the headwaters of the North Saskatchewan River watershed. Bull trout populations are being assessed at a HUC 10 scale.

Our objectives for this study were to:

1. Describe bull trout and mountain whitefish distribution and abundance to address FSI data deficiencies in the headwaters of the North Saskatchewan River watershed.

2. Describe fish inventory and stream habitat in priority HUC 10 watersheds as identified by project partners.

1 2.0 STUDY AREA

The North Saskatchewan River originates in Banff National Park. Major headwater tributaries include the Ram, Clearwater and Brazeau rivers (Figure 1). Cold water habitat suitable for bull trout and other salmonids is located mainly upstream of the confluence of the Clearwater and North Saskatchewan rivers, and in the Brazeau watershed above the Brazeau Reservoir. Land use activities outside of the national parks include forestry, oil and gas exploration, and recreation. Land use within the national parks is restricted and primarily recreational (North Saskatchewan Watershed Alliance 2005). Priority areas for sampling HUC 10 watersheds were identified in consultation with project partners with highest priority given to areas in the bull trout range where current fishery inventory data are absent or dated. Our 2017 study area consists of the Blackstone and Brazeau river watersheds (HUC 8) upstream of the Brazeau dam and include the following HUC 10 watersheds: Upper Blackstone River (BS), Brown Creek (B) Chungo Creek (C), Devil Forks (DF), Thistle Creek (T), and Wapiabi Creek (W) (Figure 2). West Fraser Mills Ltd’s forest management area includes portions of the Chungo Creek, Brown Creek, Thistle Creek, and Devil Forks watersheds.

Figure 1. Map of the headwaters of the North Saskatchewan River watershed and the fishery inventory watersheds, 2017. Inset map shows the location within the province of Alberta.

Figure 2. Map of the HUC 10 watersheds showing the location of backpack and tote-barge electrofishing sites, 2017.

4 3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Fish distribution and abundance

From July 7 to August 24, 2017, we sampled 52 randomly distributed sites to describe bull trout, mountain whitefish, and other fish species distribution and relative abundance in six HUC 10 watersheds (Figure 2). We distributed prospective sample sites at 1,200 m intervals in an upstream progression along the length of third- to fifth-order streams (> 400 m; 1:20,000 scale) (Strahler 1952) within each HUC 10 watershed using a geographical information system (GIS) (ArcGIS version 10.4) and the Government of Alberta Resource Management Information Branch hydro line data layer. Sample sites were randomly selected without replacement using a Generalized Random Tessellation Stratified (GRTS) design (Stevens and Olsen 2004). We used a conservative target of eight sample sites per HUC 10 watershed based on past evaluations of our power to detect immature bull trout (Rodtka and Judd 2015; Rodtka et al. 2015). Additional sites were added to the Wapiabi Creek watershed (sites WA1 and WA2) to ensure sampling was completed on the mainstem portion of the creek. To accommodate non-response sites we drew a total of 11 sites per sample frame. Sites were assessed in the order in which they were drawn. In total, seven sites were considered non-response and alternates were chosen. The non- response sites included five dry sites and two inaccessible sites. The GRTS sampling design allowed us to adjust our sample size to accommodate these nonresponse sites while maintaining a spatially balanced sample (Stevens and Olsen 2004).

A handheld Global Positioning System (GPS) was used to locate sample sites. All site sampling commenced at the head of riffle habitat. Our sample protocol for backpack electrofishing required sample sites be 300 m long (measured with a hip chain). Two sites were less than 300 m due to unsuitable electrofishing conditions (mean site length ± SD; 296 m ± 21 m). Sites were sampled using a Smith-Root LR-20B backpack electrofisher with pulsed DC (voltage 250 – 400 V, frequency 30 – 40 Hz and duration 8.6 – 11.3 ms).

The mainstem of the Blackstone River downstream of the Blackstone Gap (Figure 2, site BL1) was excluded from our initial draw of sample sites as we had originally planned to sample the lower river using float electrofishing gear. However, flow conditions in this section of the Blackstone River were inadequate for float electrofishing gear at the time of sampling and required sampling to be completed by tote-barge. We sampled two sites (sites BL1 and BL6) on the Blackstone River using a Smith-Root SR-6 tote-barge electrofisher with a 2.5 GPP (typical

5 settings were 60 Hz at 40% – 50% of high range). We sampled moving downstream from the start of the site with a three-person crew consisting of one tote-barge operator, one anode pole operator, and one netter. The tote-barge sites were 500 m long (measured with a range finder).

We angled the Blackstone River while scouting sample site access locations and water conditions prior to tote-barge electrofishing. Angling was conducted in teams of two using jigs and spinners on baited hooks. Angling effort was measured by the individual angler using a stopwatch. We returned our angling catch to the river at the point of capture after sampling.

Electrofishing effort (seconds) was recorded at 50 m and 100 m intervals for backpack and tote- barge sites, respectively. Fish were identified to species, enumerated, and measured (fork length, FL, mm). Bull trout were visually inspected upon capture for morphological features of hybridization with brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) based on criteria in Popowich et al. (2011). Immature bull trout and immature mountain whitefish were defined as ≤ 150 mm FL (ASRD and ACA 2009) and < 230 mm FL (Jason Cooper, AEP Fisheries Biologist, personal communication), respectively when reporting abundances.

3.2 Stream habitat measurement

At all sample sites, we measured stream temperature (1°C) and ambient stream conductivity (1 μS/cm) prior to electrofishing. Ambient stream conductivity has been demonstrated to significantly impact detection of immature bull trout using electrofishing gear (Rodtka et al. 2015). We measured stream depth (0.01 m), wetted width (0.1 m), and rooted width (0.1 m) at transects spaced at 50 m and 100 m intervals for backpack and tote-barge sites, respectively. Habitat type and dominant substrate type were assessed between transects. We visually estimated the percentage (nearest 5%) of pool habitat (reduced current velocity, little surface turbulence, water deeper than surrounding areas), riffle habitat (swift flow of water over bed materials producing surface turbulence), and run habitat (uniform but swift flow of water without surface waves). Dominant substrate type was scored based on a modified Wentworth (1922) scale and included: fines (< 2 mm; score 0), small gravel (2 – 16 mm; score 1), large gravel (17 – 64 mm; score 2), cobble (65 – 256 mm; score 3), boulder (>256 mm; score 4), and bedrock (score 5).

Stream temperature plays an important role in aquatic community processes and has been correlated to specific fish species distribution and abundance (Isaac et al. 2012; Rieman et al.

6 2007). We measured summer (July 1 – August 31) stream temperature (1°C) every hour at 13 stations located throughout the six HUC 10 watersheds to describe the thermal habitats available (Figure 3). All fish and habitat information acquired in the field was submitted for inclusion into the AEP Fisheries and Wildlife Management Information System (FWMIS) database.

Figure 3. Map of the HUC 10 watersheds showing the location of stream temperature stations in each watershed and the Blackstone River, 2017.

8 4.0 RESULTS

4.1 Fish distribution and abundance

4.1.1 Electrofishing

We sampled 52 sites with backpack electrofishing (n = 50) and tote-barge electofishing (n = 2) gear resulting in over 53,000 seconds of effort over 15.8 km of stream. In addition to bull trout, our catch included: brook trout, cutthroat trout (Onchorynchus clarki), longnose dace (Rhinichthys cataractae), longnose sucker (Catostomus catostomus), mountain whitefish, and spoonhead sculpin (Cottus ricei). Bull trout were captured in all six HUC 10 watersheds and at 33 of the 40 sites where fish were detected. Twelve sites had 0 fish captures (Figure 4). None of the bull trout captured showed evidence of hybridization with brook trout. Mountain whitefish were captured in four of the six HUC 10 watersheds, they were not captured in the Chungo Creek or Thistle Creek watersheds (Table 1). Non-native brook trout were most widely distributed in the Brown Creek and Devil Forks watersheds. Site specific catch information is provided in Appendix 1.

The relative abundance (mean catch per 100 m) of bull trout ranged from 5.68 to 0.42 and was highest in the Thistle Creek watershed (Table 2). Relative abundance of mountain whitefish was highest in the Upper Blackstone River watershed. Bootstrapped mean relative abundance (10,000 replicates) of bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, and cutthroat trout for each HUC 10 watershed is provided in Appendix 2.

Figure 4. Map of the HUC 10 watersheds showing the distribution of fish species captured using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear, July 7 to August 24, 2017. Species codes: BKTR = brook trout, BLTR = bull trout, CTTR = cutthroat trout, MNWH = mountain whitefish.

10 Table 1. Number of sites where fish were detected in each HUC 10 watershed and total catch of fish species using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear, July 7 to August 24, 2017. Species codes: BKTR = brook trout, BLTR = bull trout, CTTR = cutthroat trout, LNDC = longnose dace, LNSC = longnose sucker, MNWH = mountain whitefish, SPSC = spoonhead sculpin.

Number of sites where fish were detected (n) Total Upper Blackstone Brown Chungo Devil Thistle Wapiabi catch (n) Species River Creek Creek Forks Creek Creek (%) BKTR 1 5 2 5 0 3 80 (11) BLTR 5 7 5 4 8 4 308 (44) CTTR 5 2 2 0 1 3 66 (9) LNDC 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 (< 1) LNSC 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 (1) MNWH 4 1 0 1 0 2 235 (34) SPSC 1 0 0 1 0 1 3 (< 1)

Table 2. Relative abundance of bull trout and mountain whitefish in each HUC 10 watershed using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear, July 7 to August 24, 2017.

Mean catch/100 m (95% CI) HUC 10 watershed Bull trout Mountain whitefish Upper Blackstone River 1.08 (0.25 – 2.30) 4.38 (0.60 – 8.52) Brown Creek 1.88 (0.33 – 4.08) 0.17 (0 – 0.50) Chungo Creek 1.75 (0.67 – 3.08) – Devil Forks 0.42 (0.04 – 1.00) 0.04 (0 – 0.13) Thistle Creek 5.68 (4.04 – 7.58) – Wapiabi Creek 1.17 (0.10 – 2.93) 1.36 (0 – 3.23)

Our bull trout catch ranged in size from 43 mm FL to 428 mm FL and mainly consisted of immature fish (n = 176). Mountain whitefish size ranged from 65 mm FL to 359 mm FL. Immature mountain whitefish were most abundant at site BL6 (n = 59). Immature bull trout and immature mountain whitefish were detected in all of the HUC 10 watersheds where both species occurred (Table 3). The size range of brook trout and cutthroat trout was 33 mm FL to 232 mm FL and 28 mm FL to 370 mm FL, respectively. Length frequency histograms of our brook trout, bull trout, cutthroat trout, and mountain whitefish catch are contained in Appendix 3.

11 Table 3. Size distribution of fish species captured in each HUC 10 watershed using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear, July 7 to August 24, 2017. Species codes: BKTR = brook trout, BLTR = bull trout, CTTR = cutthroat trout, LNDC = longnose dace, LNSC = longnose sucker, MNWH = mountain whitefish, SPSC = spoonhead sculpin.

Fork length Fish species HUC 10 Watershed (mm) BKTR BLTR CTTR LNDC LNSC MNWH SPSC Upper Blackstone River n 2 40 30 0 6 189 1 Mean ± SD 153 ± 30 210 ± 77 146 ± 56 – 389 ± 24 227 ± 52 86 Range 123 – 182 116 – 387 28 – 276 – 345 – 429 111 – 359 – Brown Creek n 25 45 10 0 0 4 0 Mean ± SD 147 ± 42 145 ± 34 106 ± 27 – – 237 ± 49 – Range 33 – 232 43 – 215 88 – 185 – – 185 – 315 – Chungo Creek n 24 42 14 0 0 0 0 Mean ± SD 147 ± 13 163 ± 35 120 ± 55 – – – – Range 118 – 179 88 – 236 68 – 226 – – – – Devil Forks n 21 10 0 2 1 1 1 Mean ± SD 152 ± 44 178 ± 26 – 68 ± 6 83 65 80 Range 56 – 223 122 – 204 – 62 – 74 – – – Thistle Creek n 0 136 1 0 0 0 0 Mean ± SD – 129 ± 58 370 – – – – Range – 47 – 428 – – – – – Wapiabi Creek n 8 35 11 0 0 41 1 Mean ± SD 147 ± 30 162 ± 64 239 ± 71 – – 250 ± 53 80 Range 92 – 195 85 – 345 97 – 346 – – 105 – 336 –

12 4.1.2 Angling

We angled 12 km of the Blackstone River totaling 13.9 hours of effort. We captured 46 bull trout, 24 cutthroat trout, and one mountain whitefish. The mean ± SE catch-per-unit-effort of bull trout was 3.8 ± 1.1 fish/km. Bull trout ranged in size from 260 mm FL to 413 mm FL, with a mean ± SD of 348 ± 33 mm FL. The single mountain whitefish had a length of 326 mm FL. Length frequency histograms of our angling catch are provided in Appendix 4.

4.2 Stream habitat measurement

The summer of 2017 was notably dry (Appendix 5) and resulted in low stream flows for much of the sampling period. Cobble substrate was predominately found throughout the sample sites with the exception of the Devil Forks and Wapiabi Creek watersheds which were dominated by fines and large gravel, respectively (Table 4). Ambient stream conductivity was lowest in the Chungo Creek watershed with four sites having conductivities below 150 µS/cm and highest in the Upper Blackstone River watershed. See Appendix 6 for site specific habitat measurements.

13 Table 4. Summary of stream habitat measurements in each HUC 10 watershed collected while backpack and tote-barge electrofish sampling, July 7 to August 24, 2017. Substrate codes: B = boulder, C = cobble, F = fines, LG = large gravel, SG = small gravel.

HUC 10 watershed Upper Brown Chungo Devil Thistle Wapiabi Blackstone Creek Creek Forks Creek Creek Measurement River Stream temperature (˚C)

Mean ± SD 9 ± 3 10 ± 2 9 ± 2 10 ± 1 9 ± 2 9 ± 2 Range 5 – 17 6 – 12 6 – 12 9 – 12 7 – 13 4 – 11 Ambient conductivity (µS/cm)

Mean ± SD 356 ± 147 189 ± 110 158 ± 60 281 ± 26 263 ± 16 300 ± 53 Range 181 – 612 72 – 365 73 – 223 243 – 317 235 – 284 217 – 406 Wetted width (m)

Mean ± SD 5.1 ± 5.0 5.9 ± 4.9 5.3 ± 4.8 1.8 ± 1.0 6.3 ± 3.3 4.5 ± 4.5 Range 0.5 – 21.0 1.0 – 19.0 1.2 – 20.0 0.3 – 5.5 1.5 – 15.1 0.4 – 18.0 Rooted width (m)

Mean ± SD 14.8 ± 16.4 9.9 ± 7.2 9.5 ± 6.3 4.1 ± 2.0 23.0 ± 21.6 30.4 ± 51.4 Range 1.3 – 65.0 1.2 – 27.3 2.1 – 26.7 0.6 – 13.2 2.8 – 89.2 0.7 – 268 Maximum depth (m)

Mean ± SD 0.24 ± 0.15 0.38 ± 0.23 0.26 ± 0.14 0.20 ± 0.12 0.33 ± 0.15 0.21 ± 0.14 Range 0.06 – 0.72 0.09 – 0.94 0.11 – 0.74 0.06 – 0.71 0.10 – 1.11 0.04 – 0.81 Modal stream stage Low Low Low Low Low Low Modal substrate

Primary C C C F C LG Secondary LG SG LG SG LG LG

Stream temperature measurements identified a range of temperatures in the Blackstone and Brazeau watersheds. For the HUC 10 watersheds with multiple stations, the general trend of higher stream temperatures located downstream in the watershed was observed (Table 5). Highly suitable thermal habitat for bull trout (i.e., mean summer stream temperature ≤ 10°C, maximum summer stream temperature ≤ 16°C; Isaak et al. 2009) was present only in the Thistle Creek and the Upper Blackstone River (i.e., Blackstone 4) watersheds. Mean summer temperatures at the other stations were above 10°C, however, bull trout were still found throughout the six HUC 10 watersheds. A two-day moving average of stream temperatures recorded at each station is presented in Appendix 7.

14 Table 5. Summary of stream temperature measurements from 13 stations in the Blackstone and Brazeau watersheds, July 1 to August 31, 2017.

UTM Location NAD 83 Zone 11 Mean ± SD Temperature Station Easting Northing temperature (°C) range (°C) Blackstone 1 545935 5840517 14 ± 2 8 – 20 Blackstone 3 545619 5829733 12 ± 2 7 – 19 Blackstone 4 528890 5829009 10 ± 2 6 – 16 Blackstone 5 552954 5852156 16 ± 2 10 – 22 Brown 1 542755 5846234 13 ± 3 7 – 20 Brown 2 532785 5844739 12 ± 2 7 – 18 Chungo 1 545882 5840552 13 ± 2 8 – 19 Chungo 2 537683 5839108 11 ± 3 5 – 18 Devil Forks 1 548814 5854939 13 ± 2 7 – 19 Thistle 1 503961 5849299 8 ± 2 4 – 14 Wapiabi 1 540942 5818164 11 ± 2 6 – 17 Wapiabi 2 544371 5829227 12 ± 3 7 – 19 Wapiabi 3 545304 5820914 11 ± 2 6 – 15

5.0 SUMMARY

We sampled 52 sites located throughout six priority HUC 10 watersheds within the Blackstone River and Brazeau River HUC 8 watersheds using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear. A total of 26 sites were located within West Fraser Mills Ltd.’s forest management area. Both immature and non-immature bull trout were detected in all six HUC 10 watersheds. The Thistle Creek watershed had the highest relative abundance of bull trout indicating its importance for spawning and rearing habitat. Mountain whitefish were observed in four of the six HUC 10 watersheds. Immature mountain whitefish had the highest relative abundance in the Upper Blackstone River watershed. Non-native brook trout and cutthroat trout were found in all of the HUC 10 watersheds, except Thistle Creek and Devil Forks, respectively.

Stream temperature measurements indicate that summer temperatures were highly suitable for bull trout in the Thistle Creek and Upper Blackstone River watersheds. All of the watersheds, except Devil Forks and Wapiabi Creek, had cobble as the dominant substrate, a habitat quality preferred by immature bull trout (ASRD and ACA 2009).

15 Our study provides current information on stream habitats, and the abundance and distribution of FSI priority species within the Blackstone River, its tributaries and tributaries of the Brazeau River. This information is useful to land managers when attempting to balance the diverse values of the landbase upon which they operate and critical for the conservation of native fish species particularly sensitive to habitat degradation including bull trout.

16 6.0 LITERATURE CITED

Alberta Sustainable Resource Development and Alberta Conservation Association. 2009. Status of the bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) in Alberta: Update 2009. Wildlife Status Report No. 39 produced by Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 48 pp.

COSEWIC. 2012. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the bull trout Salvelinus confluentus in Canada. Report produced by Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 103 pp.

Government of Alberta. 2017. Alberta wild species general status listing – 2015. Report produced by the Government of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 24 pp.

Isaak, D., B.E. Rieman, and D. Horan. 2009. A watershed-scale monitoring protocol for bull trout. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-224 produced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, United States. 25 pp.

Isaak, D.J., S. Wollrab, D. Horan, and G. Chandler. 2012. Climate change effects on stream and river temperatures across the northwest U.S. from 1980 – 2009 and implications for salmonid fishes. Climatic Change 113: 499–524.

MacPherson, L., M. Coombs, J. Reilly, M.G. Sullivan, and D.J. Park. 2014. A generic rule set for applying the Alberta fish sustainability index, second edition. Report produced by Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 51 pp.

North Saskatchewan Watershed Alliance. 2005. State of the North Saskatchewan watershed report 2005 – a foundation for collaborative watershed management. Produced by the North Saskatchewan Watershed Alliance, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 202 pp.

Popowich, R.C., P.A. Venturelli, J.D. Stelfox, and E.B. Taylor. 2011. Validation of morphological characteristics used for field identification of bull trout × brook trout hybrids. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 31: 548–553.

17 Rieman, B.E., D.J. Isaak, S. Adams, D. Horan, D. Nagel, C. Luce, and D. Myers. 2007. Anticipated climate warming effects on bull trout habitats and populations across the Interior Columbia River Basin. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 136: 1552– 1565.

Rodtka, M., and C. Judd. 2015. Abundance and distribution of bull trout in the Muskeg River watershed, 2014. Data Report, D-2015-002, produced by Alberta Conservation Association, Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada. 18 pp + App.

Rodtka, M.C., C.S. Judd, P.K.M. Aku, and K.M. Fitzsimmons. 2015. Estimating occupancy and detection probability of juvenile bull trout using backpack electrofishing gear in a west- central Alberta watershed. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 72: 742– 750.

Stevens Jr, D.L., and A.R. Olsen. 2004. Spatially balanced sampling of natural resources. Journal of the American Statistical Association 99 (465): 262–278.

Strahler, A.N. 1952. Hypsometric (area-altitude) analysis of erosional topography. Geological Society of America Bulletin 63: 1117–1142.

Wentworth, C.K. 1922. A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments. The Journal of Geology 30: 377–392.

18 7.0 APPENDICES

Site UTM Distance Effort Species (n) Date ID Easting Northing (m) (s) BKTR BLTR CTTR LNDC LNSC MNWH SPSC BS1 10/08/2017 529596 5820234 300 405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BS3 10/08/2017 523621 5820006 300 569 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BS5 10/08/2017 520236 5820342 300 431 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 BS6 31/07/2017 535741 5829695 300 1,015 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 BS7 09/08/2017 528673 5820381 300 616 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BS8 09/08/2017 524029 5822856 300 1,180 0 15 2 0 0 6 0 BS9 10/08/2017 524712 5828337 300 491 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BS10 10/08/2017 527797 5827790 300 1,610 0 3 3 0 0 36 0 BL1 29/07/2017 528649 5828676 500 1,652 0 12 2 0 0 75 0 BL6 31/07/2017 541642 5830472 500 2,216 0 7 19 0 6 72 1 B1 19/07/2017 526529 5844851 300 2,054 1 27 0 0 0 0 0 B2 20/07/2017 524284 5843171 300 872 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 B3 11/07/2017 538533 5851448 300 1,155 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 B4 18/07/2017 538098 5845903 300 1,870 1 1 9 0 0 0 0 B5 18/07/2017 536101 5846252 300 911 7 1 1 0 0 0 0 B6 11/07/2017 542732 5846325 300 1,734 4 1 0 0 0 4 0 B7 19/07/2017 522511 5843607 300 962 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 B9 11/07/2017 519173 5842522 300 578 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

19 Appendix 1. Cont. Site UTM Distance Effort Species (n) Date ID Easting Northing (m) (s) BKTR BLTR CTTR LNDC LNSC MNWH SPSC C1 08/07/2017 543413 5840660 300 912 10 8 0 0 0 0 0 C2 09/07/2017 534378 5838524 300 1,851 0 10 2 0 0 0 0 C3 07/07/2017 540826 5841540 300 925 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 C4 11/08/2017 521349 5833956 300 751 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C5 11/08/2017 528259 5832969 300 734 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 C6 07/07/2017 539867 5840250 300 1,806 0 4 12 0 0 0 0 C7 08/07/2017 542572 5838720 300 949 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C8 09/07/2017 530158 5836499 300 1,184 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 DF2 12/08/2017 542150 5852173 300 647 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 DF3 12/08/2017 543869 5852700 300 1,062 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 DF4 13/08/2017 543824 5853870 220 513 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DF5 13/08/2017 545858 5849371 300 839 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 DF6 13/08/2017 547933 5848870 300 833 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 DF7 14/08/2017 539537 5853614 300 1,186 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 DF8 14/08/2017 547292 5852805 300 723 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 DF9 14/08/2017 548781 5854433 300 1,034 2 1 0 2 1 1 1 T1 23/08/2017 507719 5845196 300 962 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 T2 23/08/2017 507044 5845296 300 698 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 T3 24/08/2017 506820 5850172 300 1,042 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 T4 24/08/2017 507282 5849645 300 1,357 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 T5 23/08/2017 499988 5847072 300 1,497 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 T6 23/08/2017 504534 5849376 300 1,268 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 T7 23/08/2017 508358 5846993 300 977 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 T9 24/08/2017 509484 5849510 300 999 0 10 1 0 0 0 0 W1 01/08/2017 546612 5818097 175 384 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 W3 09/08/2017 530446 5816205 300 1,442 0 25 9 0 0 0 0

20 Appendix 1. Cont. Site UTM Distance Effort Species (n) Date ID Easting Northing (m) (s) BKTR BLTR CTTR LNDC LNSC MNWH SPSC W4 09/08/2017 524719 5811781 300 549 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W5 09/08/2017 537199 5824302 300 665 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W7 30/07/2017 542189 5817128 300 547 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W8 09/08/2017 532362 5812575 300 423 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W9 09/08/2017 531330 5809982 300 523 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W10 09/08/2017 527960 5817058 300 754 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 WA1 30/07/2017 542225 5820945 300 1,713 2 3 1 0 0 13 0 WA2 01/08/2017 542087 5824532 300 1,351 5 1 1 0 0 28 1

21 Appendix 2. Bootstrapped mean relative abundance (10,000 replicates) of fish captured in each HUC 10 watershed, using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear, 2017. Species codes: BKTR = brook trout, BLTR = bull trout, CTTR = cutthroat trout, MNWH = mountain whitefish.

Mean (95% CI) catch per 100m

Upper Species Brown Creek Chungo Creek Devil Forks Thistle Creek Wapiabi Creek Blackstone River BKTR 0.07 (0 – 0.20) 1.04 (0.21 – 2.13) 1.00 (0 – 2.42) 0.88 (0.25 – 1.71) – 0.29 (0 – 0.67)

Immature BLTR1 0.35 (0 – 0.97) 0.92 (0.08 – 2.00) 0.71 (0 – 1.79) 0.13 (0.04 – 0.25) 4.38 (3.08 – 5.83) 0.63 (0 – 1.77) BLTR (> 150 mm FL) 0.73 (0.24 – 1.26) 0.96 (0.21 – 2.13) 1.04 (0.42 – 1.71) 0.38 (0.04 – 0.88) 1.29 (0.83 – 2.00) 0.53 (0.07 – 1.13)

CTTR 0.72 (0.17 – 1.54) 0.42 (0 – 1.17) 0.58 (0 – 1.58) – 0.04 (0 – 0.13) 0.37 (0 – 0.97)

Immature MNWH2 2.25 (0.10 – 5.02) 0.08 (0 – 0.25) – 0.04 (0 – 0.13) – 0.33 (0 – 0.80) MNWH (> 230 mm FL) 1.61 (0.26 – 3.22) 0.08 (0 – 0.25) – – – 1.03 (0 – 2.50) 1 ≤ 150 mm FL 2 < 230 mm FL

22 Appendix 3. Length frequency histograms of bull trout, mountain whitefish, cutthroat trout, and brook trout, captured using backpack and tote-barge electrofishing gear in the North Saskatchewan River watershed, 2017.

Bull trout

Mountain whitefish

23 Appendix 3. Cont.

Cutthroat trout

Brook trout

24 Appendix 4. Length frequency histograms of bull trout and cutthroat trout captured using angling gear in the Blackstone River, 2017.

Bull trout

Cutthroat trout

25 Appendix 5. Stream hydrographs for Brown Creek and Brazeau River generated by Alberta Environment and Parks stream gauging stations, April to October, 2017.

26 Appendix 6. Summary of habitat measurements at backpack and tote-barge electrofishing sites in the Upper Blackstone River (BS, BL = tote sites), Brown Creek (B), Chungo Creek (C), Devil Forks (DF), Thistle Creek (T), and Wapiabi Creek (W) watersheds, 2017. Substrate codes: B = boulder, C = cobble, F = fines, LG = large gravel, SG = small gravel.

Ambient Mean wetted Mean rooted Dominant/ Temp Mean depth Mean % pool Mean % riffle Mean % run Site ID cond. width width secondary (°C) ± SD (m) (min-max) (min-max) (min-max) (µS/cm) ± SD (m) ± SD (m) substrate BS1 5 181 1.5 ± 0.3 4.0 ± 1.2 0.16 ± 0.04 C/LG 11(0-30) 59(30-80) 30(20-65) BS3 8 480 2.9 ± 0.8 9.4 ± 2.7 0.18 ± 0.02 SG/C 1(0-5) 90(75-100) 9(0-25) BS5 8 612 1.6 ± 0.6 4.2 ± 1.9 0.12 ± 0.05 LG/SG 2(0-5) 61(30-80) 38(20-65) BS6 10 207 1.9 ± 0.8 2.4 ± 0.8 0.19 ± 0.08 LG/C 2(0-5) 70(60-80) 28(20-40) BS7 9 223 2.0 ± 1.1 3.9 ± 1.9 0.13 ± 0.03 LG/C 3(0-10) 55(40-70) 43(30-60) BS8 8 505 6.4 ± 2.3 17.8 ± 7.2 0.24 ± 0.04 C/LG 3(0-10) 85(70-100) 13(0-30) BS9 8 187 1.0 ± 0.3 2.7 ± 1.0 0.12 ± 0.04 C/LG 6(0-10) 70(65-80) 24(20-30) BS10 17 464 10.1 ± 1.7 32.9 ± 12.3 0.33 ± 0.04 C/LG 0(0-0) 100(100-100) 0(0-0) BL1 14 374 10.1 ± 3.4 41.5 ± 18.6 0.50 ± 0.16 C/LG 0(0-0) 70(40-100) 30(0-60) BL6 10 322 15.5 ± 4.0 35.8 ± 10.0 0.52 ± 0.07 C/LG 8(0-25) 53(25-90) 39(10-55) B1 10 250 7.8 ± 1.1 11.2 ± 2.5 0.35 ± 0.08 C/LG 5(0-10) 76(60-100) 19(0-40) B2 12 123 3.2 ± 0.9 5.5 ± 1.3 0.14 ± 0.04 SG/C 2(0-5) 72(55-80) 27(20-40) B3 10 253 2.0 ± 0.2 5.2 ± 2.1 0.70 ± 0.18 F/SG 0(0-0) 3(0-5) 98(95-100) B4 12 197 12.2 ± 3.1 19.7 ± 2.7 0.38 ± 0.09 C/LG 0(0-0) 74(20-100) 26(0-80) B5 8 72 3.5 ± 1.0 7.9 ± 1.8 0.37 ± 0.23 LG,C/LG 3(0-5) 23(10-30) 74(65-85) B6 12 185 14.2 ± 2.5 22.2 ± 3.1 0.65 ± 0.16 C/LG 10(0-50) 43(0-85) 48(15-90) B7 11 250 2.6 ± 0.8 5.0 ± 0.9 0.23 ± 0.05 LG/SG 0(0-0) 74(60-90) 26(10-40) B9 6 365 1.4 ± 0.6 2.5 ± 1.7 0.23 ± 0.05 LG/SG 0(0-0) 79(10-100) 21(0-90) C1 12 91 2.6 ± 0.5 4.7 ± 1.6 0.19 ± 0.06 C/LG 4(0-10) 26(20-30) 70(65-80) C2 10 204 9.5 ± 1.9 19.1 ± 3.9 0.43 ± 0.14 LG,C/LG,C 3(0-15) 69(45-100) 28(0-40) C3 12 127 1.8 ± 0.3 3.2 ± 0.7 0.26 ± 0.11 LG/C 3(0-10) 52(35-75) 45(25-60) C4 6 221 4.0 ± 1.2 7.2 ± 1.6 0.24 ± 0.06 C/LG 6(0-20) 48(20-70) 47(30-70)

27 Appendix 6. Cont. Ambient Mean wetted Mean rooted Dominant/ Temp Mean depth Mean % pool Mean % riffle Mean % run Site ID cond. width width secondary (°C) ± SD (m) (min-max) (min-max) (min-max) (µS/cm) ± SD (m) ± SD (m) substrate C5 6 223 2.3 ± 0.4 7.2 ± 2.0 0.17 ± 0.03 C/LG 1(0-5) 89(80-95) 10(5-20) C6 11 109 15.5 ± 2.8 19.2 ± 3.4 0.46 ± 0.12 LG/C 21(0-60) 49(10-80) 30(0-60) C7 10 73 2.1 ± 0.7 6.6 ± 3.2 0.15 ± 0.03 LG/SG 0(0-0) 59(40-75) 41(25-60) C8 11 215 4.9 ± 2.1 9.0 ± 2.1 0.20 ± 0.07 LG,C/LG,C 0(0-0) 73(40-100) 27(0-60) DF2 9 252 2.2 ± 0.7 4.4 ± 1.4 0.12 ± 0.03 C/SG,LG 5(0-10) 38(20-70) 58(25-80) DF3 10 288 2.2 ± 0.6 5.0 ± 0.8 0.17 ± 0.09 F/SG 30(5-60) 14(10-20) 56(30-75) DF4 12 314 0.5 ± 0.3 6.5 ± 3.7 0.20 ± 0.13 F/SG 1(0-5) 1(0-5) 98(95-100) DF5 12 259 2.1 ± 0.7 4.0 ± 1.4 0.17 ± 0.10 LG/C 5(0-15) 53(25-80) 42(20-70) DF6 9 280 1.5 ± 0.3 4.5 ± 1.6 0.14 ± 0.06 F/SG 18(10-25) 13(0-30) 68(50-80) DF7 9 243 1.1 ± 0.5 1.7 ± 0.7 0.18 ± 0.04 C/LG 5(0-10) 27(20-35) 68(60-80) DF8 10 292 1.5 ± 0.4 3.0 ± 0.8 0.27 ± 0.09 F/SG 9(5-15) 6(5-10) 85(80-90) DF9 11 317 3.1 ± 1.2 4.7 ± 1.2 0.35 ± 0.18 F/LG 16(0-45) 33(10-80) 51(20-70) T1 7 284 2.4 ± 1.2 4.2 ± 1.4 0.40 ± 0.30 F/C 50(30-90) 33(0-60) 17(10-30) T2 8 235 2.7 ± 0.4 5.2 ± 0.7 0.18 ± 0.02 LG/C 0(0-0) 100(100-100) 0(0-0) T3 7 249 7.8 ± 2.3 21.6 ± 4.7 0.37 ± 0.05 C/LG 1(0-5) 97(90-100) 3(0-10) T4 8 256 9.5 ± 1.6 18.0 ± 5.2 0.34 ± 0.06 C/LG 12(0-30) 87(70-95) 2(0-10) T5 12 278 7.1 ± 1.7 64.1 ± 17.5 0.40 ± 0.08 C/LG 2(0-5) 95(85-100) 3(0-10) T6 13 251 10.1 ± 3.1 44.8 ± 16.3 0.31 ± 0.04 C/LG 0(0-0) 96(90-100) 4(0-10) T7 11 274 4.1 ± 1.4 11.4 ± 3.9 0.18 ± 0.05 LG/C 0(0-0) 83(70-100) 16(0-30) T9 10 274 6.9 ± 1.3 14.9 ± 3.5 0.43 ± 0.10 C/LG 0(0-0) 98(90-100) 2(0-10) W1 7 249 2.1 ± 0.9 3.7 ± 1.6 0.31 ± 0.25 LG/SG 4(0-10) 54(10-90) 43(10-90) W3 10 406 7.0 ± 1.3 19.9 ± 4.2 0.20 ± 0.02 LG,C/LG 1(0-5) 88(80-100) 11(0-20) W4 7 296 2.8 ± 1.1 18.0 ± 2.8 0.15 ± 0.06 LG/C 0(0-0) 100(100-100) 0(0-0) W5 4 292 2.1 ± 0.3 4.7 ± 1.3 0.18 ± 0.03 C/LG 0(0-0) 96(85-100) 4(0-15) W7 7 327 1.8 ± 0.5 3.5 ± 0.7 0.15 ± 0.06 LG/C 5(0-10) 86(65-100) 9(0-30) W8 10 217 0.6 ± 0.2 1.4 ± 0.5 0.16 ± 0.15 F/LG 43(0-70) 0(0-0) 57(30-100)

28 Appendix 6. Cont. Ambient Mean wetted Mean rooted Dominant/ Temp Mean depth Mean % pool Mean % riffle Mean % run Site ID cond. width width secondary (°C) ± SD (m) (min-max) (min-max) (min-max) (µS/cm) ± SD (m) ± SD (m) substrate W9 8 288 2.3 ± 0.3 3.9 ± 0.6 0.13 ± 0.02 LG/C 0(0-0) 91(85-100) 9(0-15) W10 11 245 1.2 ± 0.3 1.8 ± 0.6 0.12 ± 0.05 SG,LG/SG,LG 48(20-60) 0(0-0) 50(40-70) WA1 11 348 11.0 ± 3.3 98.7 ± 11.9 0.38 ± 0.06 C/B 1(0-5) 90(50-100) 9(0-50) WA2 10 336 13.0 ± 2.9 141.1 ± 63.6 0.40 ± 0.17 C/LG 0(0-2) 98(88-100) 2(0-10)

29 Appendix 7. Two-day moving average stream temperature at 13 stations in the Blackstone River, Brown Creek, Chungo Creek, Devil Forks, Thistle Creek, and Wapiabi Creek watersheds, 2017.

Blackstone River

Blackstone 1 Blackstone 3 Blackstone 4 Blackstone 5

16 C ° 14

Temperature 10

Date

Brown Creek

Brown 1 Brown 2

Temperature ˚CTemperature 10

Date

30 Appendix 7. Cont.

Chungo Creek

Chungo 1 Chungo 2

Temperature ˚CTemperature 10

Date

Devil Forks and Thistle Creek

Thistle 1 Devil Forks 1

20 18 16

14 12 10 8

Temperature ˚CTemperature 6 4 2 0

Date

31 Appendix 7. Cont.

Wapiabi Creek

Wapiabi 1 Wapiabi 2 Wapiabi 3

Temperature ˚CTemperature 10

Date

Alberta Conservation Association acknowledges the following partners for their generous support of this project: