2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus
Prepared by the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council 2ndFloor, 1460 Sixth Ave. Prince George, B.C. V2L 3N2
June 2003
Prepared For The
NEC~iW~ WHITESTURGEON
.,.
RECOVERY INITIATIVE
- - 2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus
Prepared For The
NEC~~~~ WHITESTURGEON
RECOVERY INITIATIVE
cIa Don Cadden, R.P.8io., Chair, NWSRI Recovery Team Section Head, Fish &Wildlife Science & Allocation Environmental Stewardship Division Ministry of Water, land & Air Protection 405118-th Ave. Prince George BC, V2N 183
Prepared by the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council 2ndFloor, 1460 Sixth Ave. Prince George, B.C. V2L 3N2
Brian M.Toth, R.P.Bio.1and Jason A. Yarmish2
1 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, 2ndFloor, 1460 Sixth Ave., Prince George, B.C., V2L 3N2
2 Lheidli T'enneh Band, Natural Resource Office, #105 2288 Old Cariboo Hwy., V2N 6G3
- ---- Carrier Sekani TribalCouncil Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Acknowledaements
The 2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon was a culmination of the efforts of numerous persons. Dennis Ableson, former CSTC Fisheries Program Biologist, provided the initial impetus for initiating this undertaking. Golder Associates Ltd. completed a multi-year study design for the program and provided overall scientific direction to the activities undertaken in 2002/03, including field staff training and reviewing drafts of this report. Members of the Recovery Team of the Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative provided recommendations as to the format of the study as well as providing funding for the initiative through the Habitat Conservation Trust Fund (HCTF). The Carrier Sekani Tribal Council provided funding for the project and administered funds received from the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection (MoWLAP) through the (HCTF). Marcel Shepert (CSTC) coordinated CSTC staff management and financial administrative functions. Don Cadden (MoWLAP) coordinated overall project administration and direction. Barry Huber (DFO) facilitated the use CSTC's Aboriginal Fisheries Strategy Funding for training related to this project. Jason Yarmish (Lheidli T'enneh), Corey Stefura (Golder), (Golder), James (Jaco) Prince (CSTC) and Albert Raphael (CSTC) conducted all field sampling. The Lheidli T'enneh Band provided the services of fisheries biologist Jason Yarmish and the use of a jet boat and sturgeon sampling gear. The efforts of all persons that contributed to the initiation of the first year of this undertaking are greatly appreciated.
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. i
------Carrier Sekani TribalCouncil Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Item pg.
Acknowledgements . i List of Tables...... iii List of Figures...... iii List of Appendices...... iii
Executive Summarv .... 1
Introduction and Background...... 2 Study Area ...... 2 Background ... 3 Purpose .. 4 Methodology . 5 Angling ... 6 Setli ne...... 6 Setline Deployment and Retrieval; Stuart River...... 7 Setline Deployment and Retrieval; Stuart Lake...... 7 Sturgeon Handling and External Data Collection...... 8 Internal Examinations and Tag Implantation...... 10 Tracking of Tagged Sturgeon ..... 10 Aging Analysis...... 12
Results .... 12 Stuart River Sampling Summary ...... 12 Stuart Lake Sampling Summary ...... 13 Captured Sturgeon...... 13 Catch Per Unit Effort ...... 15 By-Catch . 15 Acoustic Telemetry on Stuart Lake ...... 16 October 15 -17 Acoustic Telemetrv Session...... 16 November 4 - 5 Acoustic Telemetrv Session...... 16
Discussion and Conclusions ...... 17 2002 Sampling Results ...... 17 Factors affecting CPUE; Stuart River...... 18 Factors affecting CPUE: Stuart Lake...... 19 Recapture Information ...... 20 Anecdotal and Historical Information ...... 22 Acoustic Tracking...... 23
Recommendations .. 23
References Cited ...... 25
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. ii Carrier Sekani TribalCouncil Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
List of Tables
No. Title Pg. 1 External measurements taken from each captured sturgeon sampled in 2002, 9 and the specific techniques for taking measurements. 2 Description of "Sexual Maturity Codes" utilized to classify the status of gonad 11 development, as applied to sturgeon sampled within the Stuart study area in 2002. 3 General information regarding sturgeon captured in the Stuart River and Stuart 14 Lake in 2002. 4 Summary of sampling effort and respective CPUE within the 2002 Stuart 15 watershed program. 5 Summary of incidental species captured. 15 6 Comparative statistics for the 3 sturgeon recaptured in 2002 which possessed 21 identifying tags.
List of Figures
No. Title Pg. 1 11x17 map of Stuart Basin (Takla Lake to Nechako) btw. 2-3 2 e-size plot of Stuart Lake and Stuart River with sampling and capture location btw. information 18-19 3 Maximum detectable range of the CART tags with a fixed gain of 75 on the App.5 Lotek receiver and over a range of water depths. pg. 2 4 Maximum distance to code out CART tag through range of "Gains" and App.5 depths pg. 3 btw.- between,App.- appendix
List of Appendices
N~ T~~ 1 Data forms utilized for recording all sampling information in 2002. 2 Data forms relating to Stuart River sampling in 2002. 3 Data forms relating to Stuart Lake sampling in 2002. 4 Summary of information relating to sturgeon captured in 2002 and associated by-catch of other species. 5 Report on trials related to CART tag/acoustic signal detection over a range of depths and distances from hydrophone and receiver.
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. iii
-- - Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Executive SUmmary
Funding to conduct this assessment of white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus) within the Stuart River watershed was provided by the Habitat Conservation Trust Fund through the Nechako River White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative (NWSRI) and the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council (CSTC). Field sampling was initiated the 3rd of September and involved the application of sampling methodologies analogous to those applied in similar assessment work in other portions of the Fraser and Columbia watersheds in the last decade. Sampling was carried out in the Stuart River from several kilometers below the Mandala~ Creek confluence to the river's outlet from Stuart Lake during September 3rd_11t and 29th_30th. Sampling within Stuart Lake was conducted utilizing a systematic approach of setline application from September 10th-28thfrom Fort St. James to the Tachie River, focusing on the western half of the lake. The two gear types deployed in the Stuart River included angling and setlines. In Stuart Lake, setlines were the only method of sampling utilized. Baits utilized included sockeye, kokanee, and pickled squid. Sampling was based on the study design developed on behalf of the CSTC by RL&L Environmental (now Golder Associates Ltd.).
The primary objective of the 2002 study was to sample the greatest range of habitats possible, documenting juvenile and adult sturgeon usage of these areas, collecting basic morphological and sexual development information, and deploying tags that emit radio and/or acoustic signals to fish of appropriate characteristics to allow their future tracking. This work was conducted as portion of the recovery efforts identified for pursuit by the Recovery Team of the NWSRI. Information relating to the linkage and relationship of white sturgeon within the Stuart and Nechako systems is considered potentially fundamental to the direction of recovery efforts being developed for the Nechako white sturgeon stock.
Sampling efforts on the Stuart River included 16 hours of angling and 38 setline sets amounting to 12,356.1 hook-hours of setline effort. Effort in Stuart Lake included a total of 58 setline sets that totalled 28,394.3 hook-hours of setline effort. A total of six sturgeon were captured during the course of setline sampling; two in the Stuart River {Total Length (TL) 167cm and 213cm} and 4 in Stuart Lake (TL 157-273cm). Both fish captured in the Stuart River had been previously captured during sampling carried out between 1995 and 1999 on the Nechako River. As well, 2 of the 4 sturgeon captured in Stuart Lake were also recaptures from the same program. Sturgeon were sampled for all external morphological parameters, tagged with FLOY and Pit tags, four were examined internally to assess sex/maturity status and implanted with tags emitting radio and/or acoustic signals. Two sessions of acoustic telemetry were undertaken October 15th_1th and November 4th and 5th. Both sturgeon with acoustic tags were located in the first session of sampling 10 and 25 kilometres east of their initial tagging locations. One of these 2 fish was again located during the latter telemetry session a similar distance from is original capture location.
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 1 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Introduction and Backaround Study Area The Stuart River, which drains Stuart lake to the Nechako River, is the terminus of an interconnected complex of large lakes, including Takla, Trembleur and Stuart lakes (Figure 1). The DriftwoodRiver watershed provides the northern most origin of the system, draining into Takla lake, which subsequently empties into Trembleur through the MiddleRiver. Trembleur lake drains into Stuart lake via the Tachie River. Together, this system is the largest tributary to the Nechako River, with a watershed area of approximately 15,600km2. Biogeoclimatic zones withinthe basin area are dominated by Sub-Boreal Spruce (SBS) in southern portions and Engelmann Sub-Alpine Fir (ESSF) in northern areas (Hickey et al. 1997). The Stuart basin provides natal habitats for the Stuart stocks of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchusnerka), the largest sockeye complex originating in the Nechako drainage. It is comprised of an early and late run/stock. The four-year cycle mean annual total run size (includes re- construction from all exploitation) for Early Stuart sockeye returns was approximately 340,000 fish based on 1960-1993 records (Fraser River Action Plan 1995). The four- year cycle mean annual total run size for late Stuart stocks averaged 551,000 based on 1960-1993 records, and reached a peak recorded return of 5.5 million in 1993 (Fraser River Action Plan, 1995). While potentially a direct source of food for the white sturgeon residing in the Nechako basin, these sockeye drive and maintain the nutrient cycle within the watershed, thereby controlling productivityand providingfor aquatic and terrestrial diversity.
The stream and lakes of this system support a diverse array of resident and anadromous fish stocks in addition to sockeye, including chinook (Oncorhynchus tsha,wytscha) rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), bull trout/char (Salvelinus confluentus), lake trout/char (Salvelinus namayucush), lake whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis), mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsom), burbot (Lota Iota), kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka), white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus», as well an array of non-sport fish species. These resident fish species support First Nations sustenance fisheries and popular lake and stream sport fisheries. The Middle and Tachie rivers in particular support world renowned seasonal fisheries for rainbow trout that move into these streams to capitalize on food sources created by the thousands of sockeye that spawn in these areas.
The area has long been occupied by First Nations peoples and includes present day First Nation's Communities of the Nak'azdli Band, Yekooche First Nation, TI'azt'en First Nation (Pinchi, Tachie, Grand Rapids, Middle River), and Takla First Nation (Takla landing and West landing). Fort St. James is the largest
2002103 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 2
------
Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund to 120m length, with each deploying 24 hooks. Pickled squid and sockeye were the two baits utilized. Once the last hook was attached, the second anchor was dropped and the finalfloat rope fed out. A UTMcoordinate was taken during this process to reference the set location. As with river sets, both bouys were marked for identification purposes. Allsets were typicallyretrieved from the bow, except where high winds were a factor. Inthe case of parallel winds, the downwind float was picked up first from the bow, to enable the boat to operate into the wind. Where the wind was blowing perpendicular to the set, it was retrieved from the side of the boat, so boat position into the wind could be maintained. Hooks were removed as they were encountered, and information pertaining to the size of the hook, its position on the setline, and the state of the bait/hook was recorded.
Sturgeon Handling and External Data Collection When setlines were retrieved and fish were encountered, they were immediately maneuvered from the bow of the boat to the side using the setline, allowing the fish to stay in the water. Fish then had a 2m tail noose placed on them that was then tied off to a cleat on the gunnel of the boat. Upon securing the fish, the hook was then removed. The remainder of the setline was retrieved and any other "hooked" fish were dealt with in a similar manner. While still tail noosed and remaining in the water, sturgeon were maneuvered into a stretcher and lifted into the boat using a gunnel mounted davit. The boat was then either anchored mid-channel or tied off to the shore on the river, or typically permitted to drift on the lake while data collection/processing was completed on the fish. While being processed, sturgeon remained in the water-filled stretcher, which was suspended in a metal frame mounted on the gunnels of the boat and manufactured specifically for this purpose. The mounts held the stretcher on a 15° angle that maintained the head (anterior) end of the fish sloping downward into a vinyl fabric hood. Fresh water was flooded into the stretcher manually to provide the fish with a constant supply of fresh oxygenated water.
A range of morphological parameters were collected from all fish sampled, which were consistent with other Fraser watershed sturgeon studies (RL&L 2001). Length and girth measurements were collected using a cloth metric tape. Measurements taken included total length, fork length, postorbital length, post opercular length (snout) and girth, and all were recorded to the nearest 0.5cm. Table 1 lists the specifics of the external measurements that were collected from captured fish and the methodologies associated with each. Weights of fish were determined using a 135 i:2.3 kg capacity spring scale calibrated with known 10 kg. weights. Fish were examined for any external anomalies or damage such as missing scutes and scars. They were also assessed visually for general health
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 8
- ---- Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
and previous tag application/sampling. Fish received a uniquely numbered external spaghetti type tag (FLOY T-anchor 11/811)in red. Red FLOY tags included the CSTC name and a contact number. The external FLOY tag was applied using a Dennison Mark 11tagging gun and was inserted through the dorsal fin rays at an approximate 45° angle to the right anterior of the fish. This would leave the tag trailing to the left posterior of the fish.
Table 1. External measurements taken from each captured sturgeon sampled in 2002, and the specific techniques for taking measurements. Measurement Specific Technique For Measurement From the center of the curvature of the snout, along the lateral line to Total Length the posterior terminus of the caudal peduncle, where the tape was held and redirected along the dorsal length of the caudal fin to its tip. From the center of the curvature of the snout, along the lateral line, to Fork Length the fork of the tail. Post Orbital From the center of the curvature of the snout to the back of the eye Length socket. From the center of the curvature of the snout to the posterior edge of Post Opercular the opercular plate. In the case of a gap between the operculum and Length the bony structure located posterior of the opercular plate, the gap was included in this measurement. Taken as the circumference of the fish's body on the posterior side of Girth the pectoral fins.
A uniquely coded internal tag (PIT TX 1400L Destron 11.5mm x 2.1mm) was inserted under the skin approximately half way between the lateral line and dorsal fin, on the left side of the fish. PIT tags were injected using a plunge type PIT tag injector. The unique digital PIT tag code was "scanned" and recorded prior to injection, and "scanned" and confirmed post injection. PIT tags were scanned using a "Power Tracker 11Reader".
A small piece of tissue for genetic analysis was removed from the tip of the left pectoral fin, except where fin damage or anomalies were present, in which case sampling took place on the right side. Tissue samples were placed in a 2ml sample vial in 70% ethanol. The size of the sample varied between fish, but rarely exceeded a 0.5cm2 piece of tissue. The labeled sample vial was placed in a labeled scale envelope. Recaptured fish did not require a repeat of this sampling procedure.
Bone structures for determining fish age were removed from the leading ray of the pectoral fin. These samples were typically removed from the left pectoral fin, except where fin damage or anomalies occurred, in which case the fin ray
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 9 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
sample was removed from the right pectoral. This sample was removed approximately 2cm away from the articulation where the pectoral fin meets the body. Using a small hacksaw with a carbon steel blade, a small piece of the fin ray was removed by cutting at right angles to the pectoral fin. This fin ray section was then placed in a labeled envelope.
Internal Examinations and Tag Implantation Following the external procedure, individual fish were then examined internally to determine the sex and relative state of maturity based on gonad development. The incision was typically made offset of the ventral midline, alongside the fourth ventral scute. The incision area was swabbed in betadine surgical scrub and all instruments were sterilized using a diluted isopropanol bath. Germaphine, another antiseptic soap, was used to wash gloved hands prior to procedure. The length of the incision rarely exceeded 2cm. This would accommodate the tip of the otoscope, and enable a visual examination of the gonad. Fish were then assigned a maturity code based on the sex and level of gonad development. The visual criteria that are utilized to assign a sex and maturity code are described in table 2 below, as described in Conte et al. (1998).
Following the determination of sex and maturity, each of the fish captured in the lake were implanted with either a sterilized radio or CART (combined acoustic radio transmitting) tag using the incision made for the internal exam. The antennae was threaded through a 14 gauge cannula and the transmitter pulled through the incision into the body cavity. The incision was closed using a 2/0 PDS 11,CT-2 dissolving suture, with a series of mattress and/or simple stitches. The tag was tested prior to implantation into the fish. The time required to complete the external, internal and surgical sampling procedures was normally less than 30 minutes, although with training taking place, this time was extended on occasion. All instruments used for intrusive procedures were sterilized in a bath of isopropanol prior to each sampling event and storage.
Tracking of Tagged Sturgeon It is widely known that the use of radio tags for tracking fish in a lake environment can be highly problematic, as the ability to detect radio signals is hampered with increasing tag depth. This fact precipitated the NWSRI's recommendation for the use of CART tags for attachment to sturgeon captured during this study. CART tags have the ability to transmit both acoustic and radio signals. The acoustic signal, which must be detected using a hydrophone placed directly in the lake environment, is more feasibly detected than a radio signal, which is normally monitored via aerial flights.
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 10 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Table 2. Description of "Sexual Maturity Codes" utilized to classify the status of gonad development, as applied to sturgeon sampled within the Stuart study area in 2002. Sex Code Development StateDescription
Male 1 non-reproductive, testes appear as thin strips with no pigmentation maturing; small testes; some folding may be apparent; translucent, Male 2 smoky pigmentation
early reproductive; large testes, folds beginning to form lobes; Male 3 some pigmentation stillpresent; testes more white than cream coloured
Male 4 late reproductive; testes large, often filling posterior of body cavity; white with littleor no pigmentation
Male 5 ripe; milt flowing; large white lobular testes; no pigmentation Male 6 spent; testes pinkish-white, flaccid,and strongly lobed Male 10 general unknown maturity
Female 11 non-reproductive; ovaries small, folded with no visible oocytes; tissue colour white to yellowish
pre-vitellogenic, moderate size ovary with small eggs present (0.2 Female 12 to 0.5 mm diameter);may have "saltand pepper" appearance early vitellogenic;large ovary varying in colour from white to Female 13 yellowish-cream to light grey; eggs 0.6 to 2.1 mm in diameter late vitellogenic; ovaries large with pigmented oocytes still attached Female 14 o ovariantissue;eggs 2.2 to 2.9 mm in diameter; sometimes with salt and pepper appearance Female 15 ripe;eggs fully pigmented and easily detached from ovarian tissue; eggs 3.0 to 3.4 mm in diameter Female 16 spent;ovariesareflaccid with some residual fully developed eggs pre-vitellogenic with attritic oocytes; small eggs «0.5 mm Female 17 diameter) present; dark pigmented tissue present that may be reabsorbed eggs Female 20 general unknown maturity Unknown 97 adult based on size, no surgical examination Unknown 98 .uvenile/sub-adult based on size, no surgical examination Unknown 99 gonad undifferentiated or not visible during surgical examination
Both LOTEK CART (Combined Radio and Acoustic Transmitter) tags model 16_2 and internally implanted radio tags were deployed during this study via the methodology described above. No aerial tracking of the fish radio tagged during this study was undertaken as a part of this study, although, periodic flights of the Nechako and Stuart rivers were conducted by MoWLAP staff from Prince George. Boat-based tracking of acoustic transmissions from CART tagged fish was completed on two occasions in the fall of 2002. This was accomplished utilizing a LOTEK LHP_1 Activ Hydrophone and LOTEK SRX_400 Telemetry Receiver. The general methodology for searching for acoustic signals involved travelling a grid patterns in the search boat utilizingthe boats GPS system. At
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 11 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
predetermined distances within grid search pattern the boat was shut down and the hydrophone was deployed to "listen" for signals. The size of the grid patterns and frequency that hydrophone deployments were required was determined in the field through the process described within Appendix 5.
The use of the hydrophone for the detection of the acoustic signals emitted by the CART tags was poorly understood by the Stuart crew at the initiation of this work. The information available from the manufacturer of the tags was also insufficient for the purposes of determining the methodology for a suitable search grid to detect and monitor the locations of these fish. In order to develop the necessary information for effectively tracking these tags the Stuart crew conducted a number of simple experiments with the CART tags and the hydrophone. The nature of these experiments and results are provided in Appendix 5.
Aging Analysis The age of individual sturgeon captured was determined through an examination of the annuli patterns visible on the fin ray section that was removed from the leading ray of either the left or right pectoral fin. The structures were air-dried then sectioned using a Piercing or Jewelers saw. The average section was approximately 0.5mm thick. These sections were then polished on 1500 grit wet- dry sandpaper and mounted on a glass slide using clear household glue. Aging was performed with the aid of a dissecting microscope, with a light source directed from the underside. Ages were assigned by counting pairs of bands of opposing density. Narrow bands of higher density are assumed to have been formed during the winter growth-deceleration phase whereby concentric rings of bone-forming material are deposited closer together (Le. higher density band), relative to the annual spring-summer growth period whereby rings of bone- forming material are deposited with noticeably greater distances between them. A pair of bands consisting of one set of densely compacted rings and one set of less densely-compacted rings are considered to represent a complete annulus (Tracy and Wall, 1993). Age structure preparation and analyses were conducted jointly by Lheidli T'enneh Band (LTN) and CSTC staff, with verification provided by staff from Golder Associates Ltd.
Results Stuart River Sampling Summary Sampling efforts on Stuart River were conducted September 3rd _11th and 29th - 30th and ranged from river km37.3 to km109.6, as measured from the streams confluence with the Nechako (Figure 2). A total of 38 setline sets were applied
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page.12 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
for an average of one set for every 2km of river within the study area, and a total of 12,356.1 hook hours of setline effort. A total of 16 hours angling were also applied to the Stuart River during the above timeframe throughout this area. Two white sturgeon were captured, both of which had been previously captured and surgically assessed for sex by RL&L (both possessed surgery scars). Neither of these fish had active radio tags at the time of capture. The two fish captured are referred to as fish numbers 1 and 2 within this report and associated data records. Table 3 provides some of the specifics of the two sturgeon captured from the Stuart River. All data forms pertaining to the river sampling effort are provided in Appendix 2. Appendix 4 contains the summary sheet of all data relating to sturgeon captured during this study.
Stuart Lake Sampling Summary From September 11th_28tha total of 58 setline sets producing a total of 28,394.3 hook-hours of setline effort was deployed within Stuart Lake. Effort was applied from the town of Fort S1.James, near the lake outlet, south to Pitka Bay and north-west to the inlet of the Tachie River (Figure 2). The southwest side (Sowchea Bay up to the Tachie area) and the north arm of Stuart Lake have yet to be sampled for sturgeon. A total of four sturgeon were captured in the lake, the specifics of which are provided in table 3 and Appendix 4. The four fish captured are referred to as fish numbers 3, 4, 5 and 6 (based on their order of capture) within this report and associated data records. Fish 3 had an obvious surgery scar and a fin clip scar on the right pectoral fin, making the fish a probable recapture from assessment work completed in the Nechako River. No PIT tag could be detected and no spaghetti type tag was present, so new tags were implanted. Fish 4 and 5 (127kg female and 61kg male) were both "new" fish and each had a CART tag implanted. Fish 6 was also a Nechako program recapture; a female weighing 52kg. Data forms containing the specifics of sampling undertaken within Stuart Lake are provided in Appendix 3. Specifics regarding sturgeon captured are detailed in table 3 below and in Appendix 4. By- catch in the river and lake was very low and consisted of only Northern Pikeminnow and Burbo1.
Captured Sturgeon As discussed above, a total of 6 sturgeon were captured during this study (Table 3). All were classified as adults. Three of the six possessed tags indicating their previous capture during sturgeon assessment works conducted on the Nechako River and a fourth possessed a scar indicating it had been previously captured and surgically assessed, but it did not possess any tags.
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuarl Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 13 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Table 3. General information regarding sturgeon captured in the Stuart River and Stuart Lake in 2002. Sex Total Recapture Radio Cart Dateof Capture Girth Weight Fish Location Mat. Length Age (Y/N) Code Tag Code Comments Capture Station (cm) (kgs) (years) Tag No. Code (cm) Floy-#/PIT-# Freq. Freq. Y Stuart Floy Healthy, but large hook tear, frames 1-2, 9/4/02 SL49.6R UN 167.0 58.0 21.6 na - Y071 na na na na 1 River PIT- 1 hook damage, 2 of the fish, frame 3 of 7F7BOB1458 Sturgeon Pt. Y Stuart 9/7/02 SL45.8L UN 213.0 70.0 43.2 na Floy- Y419 na na na na Has had no surgery, no other marks or 2 River PIT- scars 7F7B031511 SL10.401 No tags found Stuart Gonads moderate size, little folding or 09/17/02 795.6046 2 157.0 61.0 26.4 28-40+ Surgery scar Lake 148.32 4 76.8 4 lobbing. Surgery scar on midline. Fish 3 863 evident,fin CIiDevident released @ 10u 402500E 6047000N SL Stuart 10.402 Reabsorbed eggs, code 17 looks like 9/18/02 760.6046 17 273 100 126 89 N 148.32 4 Lake 5 76.8 5 she didn't spawn, Released @ 10u 570 402400E 6047800N No Cart tags available for SL10.392 Stuart deployment, photo frames 10-11 fish 9/19/02 675.6051 3 231 77.5 61 44 N 148.42 12 na na 5 Lake make-up 12-14 post release 996 fishReleased at 10u 392300E 6051500N Smooth scutes, old scar top of caudal fin, tear in 5th dorsal scute; old SL10.400 y Stuart surgery scar. ovaries smokey in 09/28/02 240.6046 12 210.5 79.5 52.3 na PIT- 148.38 3 na na colour, some folds, lobbing, eggs 6 Lake 940 7F7BOC6856 small, white, less then 0.5mm, -1/3 ventral cavity filled by gonad. Fish released 10u 400025E 6047300N UN - Previously assessed for sex/gonad maturity by RL&L
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuarl Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 14 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Catch Per Unit Effort As described above, a total of 16 hook hours of angling and 12,356.1 hook hours setline efforts were deployed in the Stuart River in 2002 resulting in the capture of 2 sturgeon. In addition, 28,394.3 setline hook hours were deployed in Stuart lake resulting in the capture of 4 sturgeon. Table 4 below summarizes effort and the number of sturgeon captured and resulting catch per unit effort (CPUE).
Table 4. Summary of sampling effort and respective CPUE within the 2002 Stuart watershed program. Sitesl Catch per Unit Method Effort Sturgeon Deployments Catch Effort (CPUE) Angling 16 4 0 0 (Stuart River) 12356.1 hook 0.016/100 hook Set lining 38 2 (Stuart River) hours hours effort 28394.3 hook 0.014/100 hook Set lining 58 4 (Stuart Lake) hours hours effort
No sturgeon were captured while angling within the Stuart River although effort was made within areas known to occasionally contain sturgeon (Rl&l 2000b and local anecdotal reports).
By-Catch Angling by-catch was extremely low, and only consisted of non-sport species within the Stuart River (Table 5). Of the five northern pikeminnow captured through angling efforts within the river, all were released unharmed. Setline efforts within the Stuart River also yielded a very low CPUE of non-sport by- catch, consisting of 16 northern pikeminnow. No other species of fish were captured as by-catch in the river. In Stuart Lake there were four burbot captured using setlines and an additional 7 northern pikeminnow. Of the four burbot, one died due to the depth at which it was retrieved coupled with the fact that it had suffered some hooking related trauma. The other three were released alive. Setline sampling resulted in extremely little by-catch relative to the number hook hours of effort applied. Appendix 4 includes a complete data summary of the by- catch related to each of the sampling methods utilized in 2002.
Table 5. Summary of incidental species captured (BB- burbot, NSC, northern pikeminnow). No. Non- Method Effort No. Sport Sport Fish Fish Fate sport fish Angling(StuartRiver) 16hookhours 0 o mort 5NSC Setline(StuartRiver) 12356.1hookhours 0 o mort 16 NSC Setline(StuartLake) 28394.3hookhours 4BB 1 mort 7NSC
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 15 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Acoustic Telemetry on Stuart Lake In order to develop the necessary information for effectively tracking acoustic tags the Stuart crew conducted a number of simple experiments with the CART tags and the hydrophone. The nature of these experiments and results are provided in Appendix 5. Utilizing the information developed, two boat-based telemetry sessions were conducted in the fall of 2002 to detect the tagged sturgeon.
October 15 - 17 Acoustic Telemetrv Session A telemetry process was conducted starting on October 15 using a conservative, crude 1.2km2 grid search pattern, assisted by a GPS. In three hours, two transect lines from the Tachie River to Battleship Island were completed, with 41 individual sampling sites. This equated to 55km of linear sampling. No fish were detected. On October 16th,one of the CART tagged fish was detected during an experimental process being conducted to determine detectable acoustic tag ranges (see Appendix 4). This turned out to be Code 5, the 2BOlbfemale (fish no. 4). The best estimate of this particular fishes location was, approximately 1.5km south-east of Honeymoon Island. The fish was in about 20m of water, on a gradually sloping bottom with a 30m trench 1000m to the south-west and a shallow 6m bench BOOmto the north-east.
On October 17thtwo signals were detected and were both coded out to numbers 4 and 5. The remaining tracking efforts were conducted to determine the position of the two fish. The Code 5 fish appeared to have moved into 12 meters of water overnight, and about 2.7km from the previous days location. The best estimate of the position of fish no. 3 (code 4) was at UTM 10.409602.6034795, also in 12m of water (Figure 2).
November 4 - 5 Acoustic Telemetrv Session On November 4tha total of 47 sites were sampled over 66 linear kilometers and one of the sturgeon was detected. This fish coded out to code 5 and was identified as being located 3.5km NE of Sowchea Bay in approximately 20m of water. Sampling resumed on November 5th and was initiated at Caesar Point and continued south-east through Pinchi Bay to Battleship Island, the cut-off point for the prior days sampling. On the return north-west transect engine difficulties terminated this sampling session. No fish were detected.
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuarl Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 16 CarrierSekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Discussion and Conclusions 2002 Sampling Results As only a small portion of the intended study area, as identified by RL&L (2001), was sampled in 2002, and only six sturgeon were captured as a result of this sampling, few conclusions can be made about the white sturgeon in the Stuart watershed. Preliminary information ascertained from the work in 2002 would indicate, based on the rate of recaptured fish from the Nechako program in the Stuart River and Stuart Lake, that the Stuart River is utilized by sturgeon migrating from t~e Nechako River to Stuart Lake. Qualitative visual assessments of habitat availability and suitability within the Stuart River would appear to indicate that the potential for this section of stream to support a viable, self- sustaining population of sturgeon is nil. Limited habitats suitable for adult sturgeon are present within the river, however, substantial habitats that would appear suitable for juvenile sturgeon exist. Additionally, anecdotal evidence exists that indicates juvenile-sub-adult sturgeon were historically abundant in portions of the Stuart River. The absence of juvenile sturgeon captures resulting from the 2002 sampling effort on the Stuart River may not be due to a lack of habitat, but an absence of juveniles related to the apparent recruitment failure of the Nechako population, but this theory requires additional information to substantiate it.
The relatively low rate of sturgeon capture within Stuart Lake is likely a reflection of the vast size of the waterbody combined with the systematic nature that sampling efforts were applied (Le. applied to distribute sampling effort in a uniform nature based on the lakes surface area, rather that focusing on particular habitat units that may have a high potential to be frequented by sturgeon, the nature of which are not presently known). Additionally, sampling was only completed during the late-summer/early fall period, and thus was not capable of discerning seasonal differences in fish presence/movements and/or feeding behavior. North et al (1993) determined, during an assessment of white sturgeon distribution and movements in three lower Columbia River reservoirs, that peak captures of white sturgeon occurred in June and July in all three reservoirs. These increasing sturgeon capture rates were observed as mean monthly water temperatures increased to towards of 18°C, at which point, CPUE decreased with increasing temperature. While the temperature regime of Stuart Lake is likely very much different relative to these reservoirs, this evidence supports sampling on Stuart Lake and others within the Stuart system at earlier times of the year.
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuarl Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 17 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Factors affectina CPUE: Stuart River In the Stuart River there is a general lack of deep holding cover types normally associated with good adult sturgeon habitat, although this work indicates it is utilized by sturgeon migrating between the Nechako and Stuart Lake. Given the apparent scarcity of adult holding cover observed during sampling in the Stuart River in 2002, it is not surprising that the CPUE experienced during this work was considerably less than CPUE experienced in sturgeon assessment programs conducted in nearby areas such as the Nechako by RL&L (2000) and the upper Fraser (LTB 2002). However, as indicated within the following paragraphs that describe the habitat within the Stuart River, there is some habitat sufficient for adult and juvenile sturgeon usage, and as discussed below, anecdotal evidence collected from long-time residents of the area indicate that juvenile to sub-adult sturgeon were previously frequently captured in the Stuart River. As well, the observations of habitat suitability, relative to sturgeon, that are discussed here are based on observations made during a narrow timeframe during lower water conditions in the fall.
The first 37 kilometres of the Stuart River could be described as being in a somewhat confined state with substrates dominated by boulder and bedrock, and a morphology characterized as an extensive riffle/rapid set (Figure 2). This part of the river lacks habitats of substantial depth and is difficult to sample effectively for sturgeon (i.e. minimal habitats that appear suitable for setline deployment and difficult to safely access by boat). Previous telemetry surveys completed by Golder Associates (2002) documented occasional movements of fish through this area during high water levels. Habitat characteristics noted during previous sampling undertaken by RL&L (1998) in the lower Stuart described habitat that may in fact impede access for large sturgeon during lower summer, fall and winter flows. The average depth of sites sampled for sturgeon in the lower 5 kilometres of the Stuart was less than 1 metre during RL&L's efforts (RL&L 1998).
Between kilometres 37 and 74 stream conditions are very uniform with minimal amounts of channel characteristics and structures to produce deep pool habitats and large depositional areas, with the one exception being the habitat unit at Sturgeon Point, which consists of a large pool with a maximum depth of 13.4m. The rest of this portion of the Stuart River could be described as very slow moving with a mean depth of 2.5m (only several sites having depths of 6-8m) and the majority of setline effort was applied in 3 to 4.5 metres of water, although any site of greater depth was sampled. There are very few deep pools in this portion of the river, as the shallow sloping "U" shape channel setting coupled with a very
2002/03PreliminaryAssessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 18 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
low gradient, which combined offer little opportunity for flows to scour out holding habitat where sturgeon are typically found. The substrate within this portion of the river also indicates a lack of scouring flows, as at almost every site the substrate was silt or clay, and gravel was rarely encountered. The relative lack of deep pools and the apparent high water clarity within this portion of the stream, due to its lake headed nature, would provide virtually no cover for large, adult sturgeon. Habitats throughout portions of this section are sufficient for juvenile sturgeon.
From river kilometres 74 to 94, deep holding habitat units are further reduced from the region below. Again, the river's setting could be described as a shallow U-shape, however, the channel is much wider and dominated by mud flats/bars and extensive weed beds. Average maximum depths throughout most of this portion of the river were noted at 2 metres (using the boat's depth-finder). The presence of habitat units that would afford plausible depths for setline deployment were very infrequent throughout this section of the stream. This portion of the river could be described as relatively homogenous, with occasional islands, slow laminar flow, and a straight to sinuous pattern creating the absence of bends and/or constrictions/structures to encourage scouring of deeper pools. This portion of the river may also pose as a seasonal migration barrier to large sturgeon.
Between river kilometre 94 and Stuart Lake (km110), the river maintains a narrower channel width and higher gradient than below and gravel bars are common, and boulder and bedrock substrates are dominant. Sufficient deep pool cover potentially suitable to support some adult sturgeon usage of the area is present. This is the portion of the river where virtually 100% of the Stuart chinook stock spawns. Despite the application of sampling effort in this portion of the river, no sturgeon were captured. It is possible that sturgeon in Stuart Lake migrate into this portion of the river at times, as average depths are greater than those noted throughout much of the lower river, however the shallow flats at the lake outlet may also act to deter adult sturgeon movement, particularly under lower flow conditions.
Factors affectina CPUE; Stuart Lake Stuart Lake offers a variety of potential food sources for sturgeon and a broad range of depths and contours. The four fish captured in the lake, all classified as adults, appeared to be in healthy condition, with no external anomalies. The lower rate (CPUE) of sturgeon capture experienced in the lake in 2002, relative to CPUE experienced in sturgeon assessment programs conducted in nearby areas
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 19 CarrierSekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
such as the Nechako River by RL&L (2000) and upper Fraser by LTB (2002), could be owing to a number of factors. Stuart Lake is a large body of water, and as this was the first attempt at sampling Stuart Lake, a low CPUE might be expected, considering an absence of previous knowledge as to areas frequented by sturgeon. Additionally, as is the case when sampling a stream environment, crews are not afforded the visual capability of assessing potential sampling sites for their suitability in the lake environment, which necessitated the use of a systematic sampling approach to effort application in Stuart Lake in 2002. As well, there are still large portions of Stuart Lake that were not sampled in 2002, due to budget and time constraints, and sampling was only conducted over a short time period.
Recapture Information Of the six fish captured in the Stuart system in 2002, 4 had been previously tagged, although one of the four no longer possessed any identifying tags. For the purposes of this report the six fish captured have been assigned a number of 1-6 based on their order of capture (Table 3). Comparative statistics for the three sturgeon captured in 2002 that were recaptures from previous sampling conducted on the Nechako are presented in table 6. Both fish captured in the Stuart River were previously marked and sampled in the Nechako River. Fish no. 2 demonstrated a reduction in weight at the time of capture in 2002, relative to its capture four years previous, which was reflected in girth measurements.
In Stuart Lake, two of the four fish captured in 2002 were recaptures (fish nos. 3 and 6) from the previous Nechako program. Unfortunately, one of the two (fish no. 3) had shed its FLOY or Dart tag, and the PIT tag could not be located. There was, however, an obvious surgery scar, FLOY or DART tag scar and an age structure had been removed from the right pectoral fin. A new aging structure and DNA sample were removed from the left pectoral fin, and a new FLOY and PIT tag were implanted. This fish was also assessed internally, and assigned a sex/maturity code of 02. It was fitted with an internal CART tag. The sturgeon captured in Stuart Lake that did possess an identifying tag had increased in size according to all parameters measured. No aging structures were collected from recaptured fish that possessed identifying tags, which in retrospect was a mistake. Future sampling will include the removal of aging structures from sturgeon that have been previously captured and aged as a result of assessment activities in the Nechako River (see Recommendations).
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuarl Watershed White Sturgeon Page.20 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Table 6. Comparative statistics for the 3 sturgeon recaptured in 2002 which possessed identifyingtags. Fork Sex Mat. Fork Girth Weight Age Fish Dateof Original SexMat. Length Girth Weight Age Dateof 1st Location Code@ Length (cm)@ (years)@ Number recap in Capture 1st Code@ (cm)@ 1st (cm)@ (kgsl1s @ (kgs) @ 1st (years)@ 2002 Capture @ recap location 1st (cm)@ Assigned recap Recap Recap Recap in 2002 Capture Capture Recap Capture Capture capture Stuart Nechako 9/4/02 6/23/96 River 02 na 120 145 46.5 15.9 21.6 25 1 km95 58.0 na km49.6 Stuart Nechako 9/7/02 9/3/98 River 04 na 183 191 71.5 70.0 46.8 na 2 km114.9 43.2 47 km45.8
Stuart Nechako 9/28/02 # # 12 168.5 182 63 79.5 35.5 52.3 45 na 6 Lake km116.2
na - Information not collected or available
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page.21 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Anecdotal and Historical Information Historical information regarding white sturgeon within the Stuart watershed was difficult to obtain, as records are fragmented and anecdotal information is often second or third generation. In Norcan's (2000) Review of Historical White Sturgeon Distribution within the Nechako River Watershed a summary of Hudson's Bay Company records provided evidence of historical sturgeon harvest from the Nechako and Stuart systems on a regular basis by both First Nations and company employees. It also provided some direction as to the areas of capture. Informal conversations between the Stuart crew in 2002 and local First Nation people in Fort St. James gave further direction to areas of documented sturgeon captures and presence in Stuart Lake, including Sowchea Bay, Pinchi Bay, Stuart River outlet, and near the Tachie River inlet.
In discussions with Charlie Davidson, a long time resident at Sturgeon Point on the Stuart River whose family history at this location goes back to at least the early 1900's, further information was ascertained regarding previous sturgeon presence and use by local residents. This included the regular capture of juvenile-sub-adult (described as "3 foot") sturgeon that he recalled occurring up until the mid-1900s from the Stuart River in the Sturgeon Point area. Mr. Davidson stated that both he and his father would fish for small sturgeon to feed haying crews, and there was no difficulty catching these fish in this location. In discussions with another long time Fort St. James resident, a 12" sturgeon mortality was described as having been seen floating behind the Canfor pier in Stones Bay, the result of by-catch from a setline targeting burbot (Paques, 2002).
Five sturgeon were reported as captured by TI'azt'en First Nation food fishers near the Tachie River confluence in 2002, one of which was confirmed as harvested (TI'azt'en Fisheries Staff 2002). At least one additional fish was reported as captured near Fort St. James by a Nak'azdli Band member. It is believed that this fish was released. Additional anecdotal information relating to sturgeon captures by First Nation food fishers in Takla Lake were also received. It is interesting to note that of the reported First Nations' sturgeon captures in 2002 no small fish were discussed, but this is potentially related to the size of gillnet mesh most commonly employed during food fishing activities. Also mentioned by TI'azt'en Fisheries staff, was that there was no reported tags found on the five sturgeon captured. It is apparent that First Nations fishers within the Stuart watershed seasonally encounter sturgeon and are therefore a good source of related information. It also indicates that there is the potential for First Nation fishers to have a substantial impact on sturgeon within the Stuart watershed.
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuarl Watershed White Sturgeon Page.22 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
Acoustic Tracking It is apparent that radio signaling tags are of little use for deployment on sturgeon in a lake environment. However, evidence was developed during 2002 work that acoustically transmitting tags may be a useful tool for tracking sturgeon in an environment such as Stuart Lake. The sampling rate established during the tracking of acoustically tagged fish, which included 64 grid locations over 5.3 hours, produced a sampling rate of 12.1 grid sites per hour. Based on the tracking coverage achieved utilizing the hydrophone during this process, the entire surface area of Stuart Lake could theoretically be sampled in approximately 140 points, or 11.6 boat-hours assuming calm conditions, and using a grid not exceeding 2km2. This work would suggest that the deployment of CART tags on white sturgeon and their subsequent tracking/monitoring within Stuart Lake utilizing a boat and hydrophone is a viable and potentially efficient means of tracking sturgeon in Stuart Lake.
Recommendations Based on the results of the preliminary investigations of white sturgeon within the Stuart basin undertaken in 2002, as discussed above, the following recommendations are proposed.
1) Assessment of the white sturgeon occurring within the Stuart basin should continue until such time that: a. The Recovery Team of the NWSRI deems that sufficient information has been developed for their purposes, and/or; b. Conclusive information regarding the nature/status of white sturgeon occurring in the Stuart basin can be ascertained so as to develop management schemes as appropriate.
2) Sampling should begin far earlier in the season than 2002, and incorporate repetitive seasonal applications of effort over a range of habitats.
3) Due to difficulties in effectively using conventional radio tags in a lake environment, only CART type tags should be deployed in this program in the future.
4) Adaptive guidelines should be developed to direct field personnel as to the characteristics of the sturgeon captured (Le. criteria related to morphological characteristics and/or stage of sexual development! maturity) that will designate which fish are to be implanted with CART tag.
2002103 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 23 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
5) There is a need to further seek-out and develop Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) within First Nation and non-First Nation peoples who have a linkage to the Stuart basin. It would be of particular benefit to initiate these activities within portions of the intended study area at least 1 year prior to intended field sampling within that area. The format and function of this information collection needs to be designed and completed in close association with the Stuart white sturgeon program.
6) The TI'azt'en First Nation, which maintains a fisheries program independent of the CSTC, should be provided with all information developed in relation to 2002 activities and should be incorporated into future program activities.
7) Additional and ongoing extension work is required to be undertaken within First Nation communities that fish for sustenance purposes in the Stuart watershed in an effort to explain this work, and its relation to the NWSRI. The focus of this work should be to promote the live release of all sturgeon captured, and to promote the development of an information sharing protocol regarding historic and present knowledge of and encounters with white sturgeon. This initiative should be linked to the recommended TEK initiative (#5).
8) The installation of a fixed telemetry station on the Tachie River should be considered, as this would identify movements of the existing, and expected future, fish possessing radio and/or acoustic tags fish into this system.
9) Aging structures should be removed from all fish captured during sampling activities in the Stuart watershed, including those that appear to be fish that were previously sampled and captured during assessment activities on the Nechako 1995-1999. Age structures from these fish would provide the unique opportunity to compare age derivation over a known period of time, and thus potentially provide indicator of the degree of aging error.
1O)Continueto test acoustic tag parameters.
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 24 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
References Cited B.C. Conservation Data Centre, (BC CDC). 2002. http://srmwww.gov.bc.ca/cdc/tracking.htm
B.C. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection (MoWLAP). 2002. Draft Update on White Sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus). Prepared for the Committee On the Status of Endangered Wildlife In Canada. Prepared by Juanita Ptomely and Ross Vennesland, B.C. MoWLAP, Victoria B.C.
Conte, F.S., S.I. Doroshov, P.B. Lutes, and E.M. Strange. 1988. Hatchery manual for the white sturgeon, (Acipenser transmontanus Richardson) with application to other North American Acipenseridae. Cooperative Extension, University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Publication 3322: 103 p.
Davidson, C. 2002. Resident of Sturgeon Point. Personal Communication.
Fraser River Action Plan, Fishery Management Group. 1995. Fraser River Sockeye Salmon. Prepared for Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 43p + app.
Golder Associates Ltd. 2002. Personal Communication
Golder Associates Ltd. 2003. Recovery Plan for Nechako White Sturgeon. Prepared for Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Team, 73 pp.
Hickey, D.G., L.B. Mac Donald, and F.N. Leone. 1997. Salmon Watershed Planning Profiles for the Fraser Basin within the StuartlTakla Habitat Management Area. 244p.
Lheidli T'enneh Band (LTB). 2002. 2001/2002 Assessment of Upper Fraser River White Sturgeon. Prepared for the Upper Fraser Nechako Fisheries Council and Fisheries Renewal B.C., Prince George, B.C.: 38 p + 8 app.
Nelson, J., C. Smith, E. Rubidge, and B. Koop. 1999. Genetic Analysis of D-Loop Region and Microsatellite DNA of White Sturgeon from British Columbia - Population Structure and Genetic Diversity. Unpublished Report Prepared for B.C. Fisheries, Conservation Section, Victoria, BC.
Norcan Consulting Ltd. 2000. Review of Historical White Sturgeon Distribution within the Nechako River Watershed. Final Report Prepared for BC Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks Omineca Sub-Region. 21p + app.
North, J.A., R.C. Beamesderfer, and T.A. Rien. 1993. Distribution and Movements of White Sturgeon in Three Lower Columbia River Reservoirs. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Status & Habitat Requirements of
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuarl Watershed White Sturgeon Page.25 CarrierSekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
the White Sturgeon Populations in the Columbia River Downstream From the McNary Dam. 1:101-118.
Paques, B. 2002. Resident of Stones Bay. Personal communication.
Pollard, S. 2000. Fraser River White Sturgeon Genetic Results - Implicationsto Stock Structure. Unpublished Report Prepared for BC Fisheries, Conservation Section, Victoria,BC. 4p.
RL&LEnvironmental Services Ltd. 1996. Fraser River White Sturgeon Monitoring Program. 1995 Data Report. Prepared for BC Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Fisheries Branch. Victoria, BC. RL&LReport No. 465F: 54 p. + 7 app.
RL&LEnvironmental Services Ltd. 1997. Fraser River White Sturgeon Monitoring Program. Region 7 (Omineca-Peace) - 1996 investigations. Prepared for BC Ministryof Environment, Lands and Parks, Fish and Wildlife Section, Prince George, BC. RL&LReport No. 520F: 78 p. + 7 app.
RL&L Environmental Services Ltd. 1998. Fraser River White Sturgeon Monitoring Program. Region 7 (Omineca-Peace) - 1997 Data Report. Prepared for BC Ministryof Environment, Lands and Parks, Fish and Wildlife Section, Prince George, BC. RL&LReport No. 5650: 36 p. + 6 app.
RL&LEnvironmental Services Ltd. 1999. Fraser River White Sturgeon Monitoring Program. Region 7 (Omineca-Peace) - 1998 Data Report. Prepared for BC Ministryof Environment, Lands and Parks, Fish and Wildlife Section, Prince George, BC. RL&LReport No. 646F: 26 p.
RL&LEnvironmental Services Ltd. 2000a. Fraser River White Sturgeon Monitoring Program. Region 7 (Omineca-Peace) - 1999 Data Report. Prepared for BC Ministryof Environment, Lands and Parks, Fish and Wildlife Section, Prince George, BC. 742F: 32 p.
RL&L Environmental Services Ltd. 2000b. Fraser River White Sturgeon Monitoring Program - Comprehensive Report (1995 to 1999). Final Report Prepared for BC Fisheries. RL&LReport No. 815F: 92 p. + app.
RL&LEnvironmental Services Ltd. 2001 Stuart River Watershed White Sturgeon Project; Workplan 2001-2005. Prepared for the B.C. Ministryof Environment, Lands and Parks and the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council. RL&LReport No. 909F: 28p.
Smith, C.T., R.J. Nelson, S. Pollard, E. Rubidge, S.J. McKay,J. Rodzen, B. May
2002/03 PreliminaryAssessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 26 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund
and B. Koop. 2002. Population genetic analysis of white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus) in the Fraser River. Journal of Ichthyology 18 (2002): 307- 312.
Tl'azt'en Nation Fisheries Staff. 2002. Personal Communication.
Tracy, A.C. and M.F.Wall. 1993. Length at age relationships for white sturgeon in the Columbia River downstream of the Bonneville Dam. Washington Department of Fisheries. Status & Habitat Requirements of the White Sturgeon Populations in the Columbia River Downstream From the McNary Dam. 2: 185-200.
2002/03 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Page. 27 Appendix 1
Data forms utilized for recording all sampling information in 2002. I I I I I WHITE STURGEONDATAFORM-SETLINE (SL) Project No.. PHYSICAL DATA: Page of
River: Station: SL River km: UTM: E N Set Type (circle) Index Synoptic
Personnel: Channel Location: UB Site Description: Weather: SET: 2002/-'_@ h WaterTemp:_oC Visibility:_m Depth:_m (Min)_m (Max) PULL: 2002/-'_@ b WaterTemp:_oC Visibility:_m TotalEffort: h Gear Type(SetLine Length) m No.HooksSet(Lost):Size11=_<-->, Size12=_<-->, Size14=_<-->, Size16=_<-->, Other_ =_<-> Bait Type: No.HooksFouled: No.Baitless(Fleshed)_<--> SamplingEfficiency(1-4): (l=poor;4=excellent)
BIOLOGICAL DATA:
Morpholo ical Characteristics Post- DNA Sex Total Snout Orbital Sample PIT Depth Hook Mat. Length Length Length Girth Weight (location Fish Tags @ Tags @ Mark@ Mark@ Floy Tag Tag No. (m) Size Code Fork Length (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm) (cm) (lbs) taken) Disposition Capture Release Capture Release C. No. Size PIT Tag No. 1 - - - - 1 2 - - - - 2 3 - - - - 3 4 - - - - 4 5 - - - - 5
6 I - - - - 6
T - - - 7 I I I I I I I I - 7 - - - 8 I I I I I I I I I 1 - 8 Comments:
Velocities(mls) Station Depth Bottom 0.2 0.6 0.8 Surface Substrate Nearshore Mid Offshore MAP: (Show shore configuration, flow patterns, set locations, velocity, locations of measurement, substrate types, bank habitat, etc.)
INCIDENTAL SP: Age Hook Species Length Weight Sex Tag Cap Code Structure Sample # Fate Size Comments WHITE STURGEON DA TA FORM -ANGLING (AB -boat or AS -shore) Project No. PHYSICAL DATA: Page of River: Station: River km:_ UTM: E N Set Type (circle) Index Synoptic Penonnel: Channel Location: VB Site Description: Weather: DATE: 2002/ / Water T . .C VISJbI1l : m Depth: m noat or S___no Rod #1 Rod #2 Rod #3 Rod #4 Rod #S Rod #() Rod #7 Rod #8 Start:_ Start:_ Start:- Start: - Start: - Start:_ Start:_ Start:_ End: End: End: End: End: End: End: End: Effort:- Effort:_ Effort:_ Effort:_ Effort:_ Effort:_ Effort:_ Effort:_ HookSize:- HookSize:_ HookSize:- HookSize:- HookSize:- HookSize:_ HookSize:_ HookSize:_ Bait: Bait: Bait: Bait: Bait: Bait: Bait: Bait: Baidess:- Baidess:- Baidess:- Baidess:_ Baidess:- Baidess:_ Baidess:- Baidess:_ Fouled:- Fouled:_ Fouled:- Fouled:_ Fouled:- Fouled:- Fouled:- Fouled:- Lost: Lost: Lost: Lost: Lost: Lost: Lost: Lost: .Iflost, indicate if snagged (8) or due to fish (F) BIOLOGICAL DATA: MorDholo ical Characteristics TAG DATA Post- DNA Sex Total Snout Orbital Sample PIT Radio Cart Tag Cart Depth Hook Mat. Length( Length Length Girth Weight (location Fish Tags@ Tags@ Mark@ Mark@ Floy Tag Tag RadioTag Tag Radio Tag Echo Echo No. (m) Size Code Fork Length(cm) cm) (cm) (cm) (cm) (lbs) taken) Disposition Caoture Release Capture Release C. No. Size PIT Tal!;No. Frequency Code Freauency Code Val Del 1 - - - - 1 2 - - - - 2 3 - - - - 3 4 - - - - 4 5 - - - - 5 6 - - - - 6
7 I I I I I I I I I I - - - I - I I I 7
8 I I I I I I I I I I - I - - I - J I I I 8 Appendix 2
Data forms relating to Stuart River sampling in 2002. Stuart RIwr AnglingD8ta
2002 Preliminary Assessment of Stualt Watershed White Sturgeon Appendix 2. Sluart RIver angling deployment, Iocatlonal and habitat data.
Bah types: SK (Sockeye), CH(Chlnook),ROE(Sockeyeor ChlnookEggs).psa (PickledSquid),KO(Kokanee)
Total Hook Sturgeon Chi..... Tamp Vlslblllt) Rod Stlrt End EIIort Hook 1Io Fouled 110_ River _on km UTM (Ill;" Personnel LocatJon Dale lOCI Iml Dapth Number TIme Time (....., SIze Tvoe /YINI /YIN\ Lost SII8DeocrlDllon _r Comments C8t:nred «IN) Iml Local ImIs)' SubaIr8Ie (Index or Ne.lShore {N) Zona Eudng I Northing 8vnoDllc' MIdIM" Stuart AB49.6M 49.6 10 456693 6002039 S .NJP MID 03109I2OO2 14 1.8 11-13 1 16:30 17:30 1 6.A) PSQ N N N M_at_le OVercast N N NM 0.2 Sln-Qnwel Stuart AB49.6M 49.6 10 456693 6002039 5 .NJP MID 03109I2OO2 14 1.8 11-13 2 16:30 17:30 1 6.A) PSQ N N N Mlddieat_ OVercast N N NM 0.2 Sill. Stuart AB49.6M 49.6 10 6002039 5 .NJP 4_ MID 03109I2OO2 14 1.8 11-13 3 16:30 17:30 1 6.10 SI< N N N Middle OVercast N N NM 0.2 51& Stuart AB49.6M 49.6 10 456693 6002039 at--. S .NJP MID 04J09I2002 14 1.8 11-13 4 11:10 11:50 0.66 6.10 PSQ N N N Middleof eddie Over_ N N NM 0.2 Sill rovel Stuart AB49.6M 49.6 10 .NJP MID - 6002039S 04J09I2002 14 1.8 11-13 5 11:10 11:50 0.66 6.10 PSQ N N N MIddHIot eddle Overcaol N N NM 0.2 Sill I Stuart AB49..M 49.. 10 458700 6002034 I J'fJP MID 06I09f2002 13 1.8 11.2 1 12:40 13:40 1 3.10 PSQ N N N SturaeonPllarae _le N Y NM 0.2 Sill Stuart AB49.6M 49.. 10 458700 Sunny 6002034 I .NJP MID 06I09f2002 13 1.8 11.2 2 12:40 14:40 2 6.10 PSQ N N N Pl N N NM 0.2 sm Stuart AB49.8M 49.6 10 456700 .- Sunny ravel 8002034 I .NJP MID 06I09f2002 13 1.8 11.2 3 12:40 14:40 2 8.10 PSQ N N N Stu Pl _le N N NM 0.2 SIlt Stuart 9.6M 49.6 10 458700 Sunny 6002034 I J'fJ' MID 08I09f2002 13 1.8 11.2 4 13:40 14:40 1 3.10 PSQ N N N Pl .oddle N N NM 0.2 Sill Stuart AS37.3L 37.3 Sunny 5 .NJ' LUB 08109I2OO2 13 U 5.0 1 11:20 11:22 0.03 5.10 psa N N N Hole above shallows Sun N N N Stuart AS37.3L 37.3 0.35 S J'fJ' LUB 08I09i2002 13 1.8 5.0 2 11:20 11:24 0.07 6.10 PSQ N N N Hole aboveshalrow. Sun N Y N Stuart AS37.3L 37.3 0.35 S .NJP LUB 08I09i2002 13 1.8 5.0 3 11:23 11:25 0.03 3.10 PSQ N Hole above shallows Stuart 37.3 N Y Sun N Y N 0.35 Gtavet slit AS37.3L S .NJP LUB 08109I2OO2 13 1.8 5.0 4 11:25 12:10 0.75 ..10 N Hole above 8hanows Stuart AS37.3L 37.3 psa N N Sun N N N 0.35 Gravel sift S J'fJP LUB 08I09f2002 13 I.. 5.0 5 11:25 12:10 0.75 ..10 N N Hole above shallows Stuart 37.3 PSQ N Sun N N N 0.35 Gravel slit AS37.3L S .NJ' LUB 08109I2OO2 13 1.8 5.0 8 11:30 12:10 0.7 S.A) N N Hole above $hallows Sun Stuart ASI09.8R 109.8 PSQ N N N N 0.35 Gravel slit 10 417458 603052:3 S J'fJP RUB 09I09f2002 13 1.8 ..0-11.0 1 15:30 16:05 0.6 5.10 N N N Hole below . . Stuart ASI09.8R 109.6 10 PSQ Overcast N Y NM 0.2.4 Rock. Dravel 417466 803052:3 S .NJP RUB 09I09f2002 13 1.8 ..0-11.0 2 15:30 16:35 1.1 6.10 psa N N N HoJe below N N NM 0.2.4 Stuart ASI09.8R lOO.. 10 417458 803052:3 S . Overcast Rock. oravel .NJP Rue 09I09f2002 13 1.8 ..0-11.0 3 15:30 16:35 1.1 6.10 PSQ N N N Hole below Overcast N N NM 0.2.4 Rock. Appendix 2. 2002103Preliminary_, atStuart Wa_ White Sturgeon 8tI8rt Rhw SIdne Infarm8IIon 2002 Preliminary _oment of Sluort Watershed Whita Sturgeon Appendix 2. Stuart RIver Mtflne umpllng deptoyment and Iocatfon.llnfonnatfon ... Pull ...... Total ... w_ .... "..., Uno Ne>. EIIorI"'- FWIt UTM (UncotT8Ct8d - FItII c...... Pull VisibilityT..... VIs_ Mm. -Mu. .. Numberof Hoob ...... Bolt ..... No. Ne>. 0- v_ 0...... Units km GPO ""= ...... T_ T1mePuII_ T1meI"::: T:6 Iml IcC Cm m /m Set and SIzes ....., - ...- ..... Lost ...... HOOkTotal ...... T_ F..... -- F...... I 0"_ -- CommotItI Ca: 0;-:'- --LocoI v:, ...."...... En""" N_ ...... -IN) 1110121014101110 11JD12.1O ,... ,.., 11101210,.., ,.., MId M mod8r8Il1ydMplie MWr8ISK ..... Sl$1.81 $1.8 10 4S73OO "'0'472 0 JYJP lOB 0:3100/2OO2 18:30 """"""" 12:20 17.9 " 1.B 13 ObMfwdrollnG 8IOrIgtN81b'8Cd1ofthe '" " .., 80 . 0 $ 7 71.8 0 ..., 12$ 1. 2SS.' OK 0 0 11 1 nldtbend_ -- .... N N N ...... SLAQ.6R .... 10 JYJ. 0:3100/2OO2 lnIId8b8nd.dMppool. Thi811.dMphol8.lndftl8y8Y8l'l - 80020390 RUB 17:38""""""" ",.. 17.25 ,. 1.' " 1.8 7.. 13.4 80 0 7 , 0 EI9 121.... ,. 278 SQ 0 . , . . PI. Y Y 7.. N 0" ...... SLA9.3R -- 49.3 0 JYJ. RUB 0:3100/2OO2 18:00 """"""" 10-..., ,... ,. b8nd.oppplll 1.. " 1.' $2 ..$ 80 2 2 . . 37 37 111 111 1. 2SS SQ 1 12 0 1 ... "'-- FalrtvdMalll...... ,...,ftow N N ..... SI.!O.1R 80.1 10 ...... tIOO2804 S JYJ. lOB 0:3100/2OO2 18:00 """"""" 12:00 ,. ,. 1.. " 1.' 3.' ..3 80 $ . . 0 80 'OS 72 0 ,. 2.. OK 0 0 . 1 DLnId8 bend. betcM field "'-- N N N ....blnd.LRof ..-- ..... SlSC.3R ...., 10 e117 0CI03401 0 JYJ. RUB """"""" """ """"""'" 10:15 ".25 " 1.. " 1.' 2.' -....- ..3 80 1 2 7 . 18.338.5135 118 ,. SOS OK 0 0 " 1 - N Y t»tncUI:tonndholelJnlhllportionof ..... SL61.2R 61.2 10 448820 800S02. 0 JYJ. LUB """"""" 13:00 """"""'" 10:40 21.ee: " 1.. 13 1.' 3.' '.2 80 , Str'8WC8tNttch.oppllde $1A3.7R83.7 10 ,"7183 8OOS34S 0 JVJP RUB """"""" 0 , . 10S 0 108 130 1...... SQ 0 . 0 1 :-Ch8Iw8gII3-5m, N y ..... 13:30 """"""'" 11:00 ".. " 1.. " ,.. I.S $.2 80 . 0 7 , .. 0 151 108 ,. .... SQ 0 . 0 1 015"_- ..., ...... SUS6.1l ".1 10 ...... 8OOS82S 0 JYJP lOB """"""" 14:20 """"""'" 11:10 20." " 1.. " 0IDidI bend, felrtytlglt 1.. 3.' '.2 80 1 , , , 20.7103 103 103 1. 330.. SQ 0 0 0 1 "--"'... N Y 10 - StuortOL49...... 7 8002288 I JYJ. lOB """"""" 15:30 """"""'" 10<10 18.5 " 1.' " 1.. ... '.3 80 3 1 . . 55.s18.5111 111 1. 2SS OKISQ 1 , . 1 \(JUllbeIow N N tllrrlWltofindlltnwlthln4m d8p1h.RivrlrIlItlllNgh..,.lan*I8r ftowwlfewholel, Roll 1,rrom7 of8lte, ..... Sl73.3R 73.3 10 438822 SOOS922 S JYJ. RUB """"""'" 13:10 """"""" 10:45 ".86 ..... Sl71.9L " 1.. " 1.. 3.' '.3 80 1 2 7 , 21.6432 151 108 " 3237 SQ 0 , 0 1 D'S8l'lClofcutbank .OY8IlicIeof'-vHe N 71.9 10 439958 800_ 0 JYJ. lOB """"""" 12.30 """"""'" 11:10 22." " 1.8 " 1.. 2.. 1 """'" N N on ... . 80 2 7 . 22.7..., 1 138 1. 362.' SK 0 0 1. 1 ...... -- RoII1rrom8of8h N N N 0.3 ...... Sl70.2L 70.2 10 _7 8OOS496S JYJ. LUB """"""'" 12:15 """"""" 11:30 23.25 " 1.8 " 1.8 3.' 3.7 80 2 8346.511883 " 1 .... N -- SL67.9R 87.9 10 .e,,1 800S81. 0 JYJ. RUB """"""" 13:30 """"""'" 11:40 22.1 13 1.B . , ...... SQ . 0 1 ..-.... -- Frwn85.RoI1ofth8Ilh N N 0.25 ...... SU56.4R " 1.B ,.. .., 80 , 1 , 7 ".3 22.' 111 155 ,. "'.. OK 2 0 " 1 ReI 1 hme.401th11a11e " .... 10 4S3SOS 8000815 0 JVJP RUB """"""" 14:15 """"""" 12:10 21.8 13 U " 1.B '.3 ... so -- """'" Y N ... , 1 . . 11021 87.6131 1. 380.' SQ 1 . 0 1 ...... -- N Y N 0.2 ...... SI.42.4R 42.' 10 48368S 8001330 S JYJ. RUB """"""'" 15:45 0710912OO2 11:10 18.45 13 1.B 13 1.. 3.1 on W- bank. 8bo'M ,.. 80 . 1 . , 77..,." 117 87.3 1. 311.2 SQ 0 0 0 1 ...... RiY8r.llttlltMtIn1hll8lCtlon N Y N 0.' ...... SL45.8L .... 10 _78 8001800 LongIIr8Igtt1tNtich:DiS -- 0 JYJ. LUB """"""" 15:20 0710912OO2 10:00 1U8 13 1.' 13 1.' 3.1 FilhC8Ughlmldod18nn8l.8IIgfIIty,_ '.7 80 , 2 . " !58 37.3 112 83.3 1. 208.. SQ 0 7 0 ...... Sun-CIoudo...-- Y N .." N 0.25 ... Re88on8bII8118, II'IOd8rItecIepttI. Not -- SL4UR 47.9 10 4SS227 800232. S JYJ. RUB """"""" 14:eo 0710912OO2 8:50 ,. 13 1.' 13 1.. 3.' ,., 80 . 1 3 7 os 1S S7 133 1. 304 SQ 0 3 0 1 Dllnfromflf'mhauM S_ =""lTIPd8pd'I N Y N 0.1S ...... SL39.4R 3'" 10 4881" 0fSof r.m. bIbov 8OOOS88 0 JYJ. RUB 0710912OO2 1U50 """"""" 12:40 24.8 ,. 1.. 13 1.. 3.' ... 80 1 . , . 201.8.... 120 149 1. 3OB.' BK 0 0 1. 1 - S F__W8IWY81Dc1t1e8 N N N 0.35 oII-- SI.... SL37.3L 37.3 10 488170 .....77 S JYJ. LUB 0710912OO2 12:45 """"""" 11::10 22.25 13 1.' Appentob8.good_l'8ferto " 1.' 2.3 ..2 80 1 2 . , 22.3.... 178 111 ,. 388 SQ 0 11 0 1 ...... - .. tormforSoc8llnform8llonof... N N HIM 0.2JO.4 .. Sl37.PR 37.8 10 HoII8b0v8... rock -- ....,...... B JYJ. RUB 0710912OO2 12:30 """"""'" 12:15 23." " 1.. 13 1.' 3.' '.2 80 , 2 . $ 71.347.5 143 11. 1. 380 SQ 1 13 0 1 ..... S Hot8b8d-8ite N N HIM 0.3 ...-... 0.... SL38.8L 36.. 10 488002 8000217 0 JYJ. lOB 0110912OO212:10 """"""'" 12:25 2'.25 " 1.' " 1.' . ,.. 80 . 2 S , 97 48!i 121 121 ,. ... OK 0 0 15 1 ItIIid8 bend below tIeIcI 0 :::'Good, ftow,end N Y N 0.2 .....- UItI8bit 01. hoI8, b!J:notmuch. WHoI8 S.... Sl87.8R 87.8 10 42S663 8014025 0 JYJ. RUB """"""'" 16:50 17.8 13 1.. 12 upper rtYetIt _Iow. Uen8Ive weed - 10:30 1.' 2.' 3.S 80 . 2 $ , 70.'352.. .. " 281.6 SQ 1 S 0 1 ..""""" R...... N N SNort SLS9.OR ".0 10 418702 8021220 S JVJP RUB """"""" 15:35 OffofgraNb8nk.above SL89.6R 10 - 9:1017.6 " 1.' 12 1.' ,.. 80 , 2 . , 02.'35210S.. 1. 281.S SQ 0 0 1 N ...... '2S2S0 801.... 0 JYJ. RUB """"""'" 18:20 17.8 13 1.' " 1.' 2.1 2.7. 80 . - R... N - 10.1>0 , 2 . $ 02.' 35.210S .. 1. 281.6 SQ 0 , 0 1 "'*"" ...... N N N 0.' -- SL102.2L 102.2 10 4'978Si1 8024380 0 JVJP lOB ''''''''''''' 11:45 Vwylm8lhole,lImIttdoppertl.nltyfar - 11:00 24.75 " 1.' 13 1.' 2.' ,., 40 2 2 2 2 49.' 49.' .... 49.' 196 SK 0 1 7 1 -- SL101iJ.6R 109.15 10 417488 !11>30523 S JYJ. RUB . SmllhoIIIbeIowr0ek8 .... lOO N Y N 0.3-0.5 0.... $Lt08.OR - 18:SO'''''''''''''12:2519.6 13 1.' " 1.' 11 40 1 2 , 2 19.6 39.2 .... 39.2 . 156.8 SQ 0 1 N 108.0 10 "7846 8020586 0 JVJP RUB IJI1o'OIII2O()211:40 ''''''''''''' 12:15 24.6 . . 0 -- R'" ""'...... N 13 1.' 13 1.. 2.' .." 80 3 0 . . 73..G 98.4221 1. 303.. SQ 0 7 0 1 -..... R... RI¥Ir8lows.. - N " N 0.1 106.9 10 R8I8tI¥8Iy hole, bIArodcy, IMYWI - -- SL106.81 "6800 80288" 0 JYJ. lOB 11:25"'011'200212:0524.6 13 1.. SL101.OL 101.0 10 "9225 80232S8 - " 1.. . ,.. 40 2 0 " 3 ".2 o 73.873.' . 196.8 SQ 0 7 0 1 R...... N N .- S JVJP LUB IJI1o'OIII2O()2030 '''''''"''''' 11:40 28.2 12 1.' 13 1="'-- 1.' 3.2 ... 80 , 2 . , 78.602.'157 131 ,. 418.2 SK 1 0. . 1 N8rr0w'1abo\oe.-ncf "--.... N Y -- SlB8.8R .... 10 425974 801.... S 1nltl8lW8g,I8rnInItfIowf,noImuch018 JYJ. RU' IJI1o'OIII2O()2 10:15 ''''''''''''' 10:3S 24.3 12 1.' 12 1.' 1.7 3 2 -- Sl81.3R 81.3 10 432351 8010959 0 JYJ. RUB ''''''''''''' 11:00 , 80 . " 72...... 1.. 122 1...... OK 0 0 . , ...... "'" N Y 1110912OO2 10:20 23.3 12 1.. 12 1.. 3 ,.. 80 3 2 . " ...... 140 117 1. 312.8 SQ 0 " 0 1 -- "'-- N N S.... Sl108.0l 106.0 10 .,_ 802_ S JYJ. LUB """"""" 10:00 """"""" U on CWidt. Nd pMIcuI8rtyIMp. 8:35 22.. 10 0.57 10 1.1 2.7 , 80 , , . . 11381.'OOA80A 1. 381.6 SQ,SK 0 3 2 1 ..- .... """'" RIwIr"tMdtend8h8IIow.... N N ..... S1.87.1R 07.1 10 _11 8020110 S JVJP RUB """"""" 11:40 """"""" 9:10 21.5 10 0." 10 1.1 2.' ,., 80 1. 1 lofrMrh811h8lw8g1n ..... SW... 92.' 10 423185 fi016810 0 JYJ. RUB """"""" 12:10 """"""" 0.. 2U 10 0.51 10 U ...... SQSK 10 2 1 1_- .... diffICUltto fllhthil..... N N N ""'"' 1.1 3.7 80 . . . . .488.4...... 1. 34S.. S 0 , , 1 ...-- .... -- ... N N ..... S.8L .... 10 421"" eo18218 0 JYJ. lOB """"""" 0Ia6dI bind8bawDog ..... LOO.OR 12:00 """"""" 030 ".. 10 0." 10 1.1 1.' 3' 80 ...... 1. .... SQOK 0 1 2 1 N .... 10 .,_ 8022374 S JVJP RUB """"""" "" """"""" ."" 21.7 10 0.86 1.1 ...... "'"'" .... N 10 0.. ,.. 80 ...... 1. 347. sa,SK 0 3 3 1 --'* .'" N N ..... 5t.103.2L 103.2 10 .,_ 802S2SS .... S JYJ. lOB """"""'" 11:05 """"""" 8:50 21.75 10 0.56 10 1.1 1.' 2.. 80 .7 --- SL1D4.4L 104.01 10 420071 802642. 0 JYJ. LUB """"""" ,.... """"""" 8:40 . . . .7.7 '7 1. 348 SQOK 0 . 1 1 ...... N Y 21.75 10 10 . 0..7 1.1 22 3.2 80 . . . . .7.7 87 '7 ,. 349 sa.SK 0 3 2 1 In8Idebendbelowbw .... N Y 12356.1 _2. 2OO2J03 ~ A88eNInIn of StuIII'tW8t8rthed WhIle Sturveon Appendix 3 Data forms relating to Stuart Lake sampling in 2002. sw. 2002 Preliminary Asseaament or Stuart Watel8hed WhIte Sturgeon Appendix 3.Stuart La'" sed!ne _Ung deployment _"010__ Sol Pull Sol Set Sol fleh Total w_ Sot w_ Pull DopIh DopIh U... No. Stu_ M..urementv.tocIIy Field UTM(UncorncI8d Set Pull EtIort Temp VIolbllltJTomp Vl8IblIII) Min. Number of Hook:8 Hook Hook Bott No.No. C - Site DHcrIatJon Ci: 0:" Locol V:C: SU_... Lob -. GPS SotT_ SolD818TimepunDate Time h'"' oei m 'oe Im' 'm' :.. Set and Sizes HooIc8 Loot Hou.. Hook T_ Hou.. T_ FouIodBaitl... FIoo_ =:: -.. Comments ,- - Ne-:,(N) Zono E88t1no Northlno SvnootIc ff" f2lOf'" fem f1.. f2lOf... fem ff" f2lOf... fem N 10 17012 8J34022 S ,...... 15:15 11. 0 u:-.... 1160(1 hook N N ...-. '0 396f40 6045756 S JYJPBC 17.0912002 13:15 ,'''''''''''''' ...'" 20.1 13 3.3 13 3.3 41.5 .. 120 5 6 6 121 121 121 101 23 ....3 P5a , 1 0 1 _...... Chow .... WPI 0 0 0 1 W8ItofWtlllnd. 81.1'IWnd N N l. 10 394161 6047885 . JYJPSC 17.0912002 13:40 ''''''''''''''' .". '95 13 3.3 13 3.3 15.2 15.9 1 . 0 . . 117 0 '76 176 ...... SK N N 17.0912002 1 B.aII2OO2 PSQ 0 0 0 1 WtllAofGLt ....Wnd .....L 10 393f95 ...... 2 S JYJPSC 13"" .. ,. 13 3.3 13 3.3 25.5 26 1 5 6 6 . '14 "' "' "...... N N B050911 ...... 3 205 24 ... SK 0 0 0 1 B8tM8n iIIend & 8hc:A ...,WPI _L 10 394767 S JYJPBC f""""""" 11>0510.<>012002 .. 22.75 13 3.3 12 3.3 13.7 14.2 '20 2 3 . 10 22B N N _l. '0 3B0203 B05325' S JYJ C 1 10:40 10.<>012002 7:20 20.6 13 3.3 12 3.3 1 .2 ,. 120 5 0 7 12 103 0 ... 47 24 494." SK 0 0 0 1 CeMotPt. ..., Wind S812.2!Qn1iJe8lllt0l . SmiIh t8IInd. R81 Wind Y N _L 10 392675 6051996 . JYJPBC,...... 1<>20 ''''''''''''''' 7:40 21.3 13 3.3 13 3.3 15.9 19.2 120 6 6 6 6 '28 128'" 128 ... 511.2 PSO 0 0 1. N N SIuotIL to 393BBO BOOO679 S JYJPBC 1 11:00 19.a112OO2 &40 21.6 13 3.3 3.3 ..1 SO ...... 15 345.. PSQ 1 0 0 1 .- ...... Wnd '2 ... SetondeltaalT8ChIeRwmcuth N N _L 0 B059B2B S JYJP :>I.aII2OO2 16:00 25.aII2OO2 9:10 17.2 11 3.3 10 3.3 ..5 ... SO ...... 16 275.2 PSO 0 , 0 , In IIICII.ihdTechieRiv8f .... Set-=rouc:c:na.nd I8keto.wdl EMtenddT8Chit N OIl ...... L. to 389122 B057000I S JYJP 2"""""" ,..:50 ?!>mI7OO? ."" ,. '2 3.3 11 3.3 10.3 12.1 120 2 3 11 . 36 .. 191 ,... .. 432 P.Q 0 0 0 , R...... _. N c-Pt.&K'1 N Y N """"'"' sa _l. 10 """"" B053B36 . JYJP 2""""""'" 14:30....."..."., 8:40 ,..2 '2 '.3 11 3.3 7.2 . '20 . 6 6 . 109109 "'" 109 2A ..... PSO 0 " 0 , ...... N N _L '0 3B63298J565BO . JYJP 2""""""'" 15:40 9"" 17.7 12 3.3 '0 3.3 7.. ..1 120 5 6 6 6 '06 06 106 105 ...... KO 0 0 0 , OfI'mDlAhdTIChI8Ri¥8r Lo8I8I1881111fi1h,lr8ck8cI8811n8.ant 1 0 3 01/ .... 16(1hook-1oIl N N N sa _L 10 38T747 6066B71 . JYJP :>I.aII2OO2 15: 25.aII2OO2 ."" 17.5 l' 3.3 11 3.3 15.6 15.8 120 5 6 6 6 , '06 105 106 105 24 .20 psa 14 MkHIk8offd Tact8 N Y _L 10 3851356056100 . JYJP 2"""""" 10>.20 25.aII2OO2 830 17.' ,. 3.3 11 3.3 21.- 21.8 '20 . 0 fO to BB. 0 '72 172 .. "2.8 KO 0 1 0 2 - .... CaUd_boo ...... _ c.pUtdlnthil..thi8 OII_""- "ft ,...... N N _L 10 3B7266 8057131 . JYJPC825.aII2OO2 10:15 2&<1912002 "' MId-88y InfrcIfCd 1".mie PSQ, .. ,...... N N 10 S JYJPCS 25QIQOO210:45:zom2OO2 10:10 234 1 3.3 11 3.3 10.4 13." 120 . 1 11 . "'.. 23.' 187 24 S01.S KO 0 3 0 1 R...... _...... :.*'.:.... -, - B057:>I2 ..boy...... "'- PSQ. .., N Y .....L '0 .....,. B055940 . JYJPCS """"""" 1'215 ...... ,...,., 10:30 22.25 11 3.3 " 3.3 ".2 ... '20 6 5 7 5 134 134 156 111 24 !S304 .K. 0 1 0 2 .... 1 ,,-"T_ .... ,.....- N Y -'-L. 10 - - S JYJPCS25.aII2OO2 11:10 10:«J 23.5 13 3.3 11 3.3 ... 7.2 120 6 5 5 . ,., ,., 1411041 24 .... 1 5 0 PSO. " " _L 10 - 6l1!i62!17. JYJ"". I""""""" 11:15I".....,.,..". 1".20 ....1 11 3.3 11 3.3 111 11.4 120 5 . 6 6 139 139 139 139 ... 55.... KO 0 5 0 1 W..lndofK'lIrll8nd .... ,...... PSO. 011pcirt.... d TIICtW ... perpendicU8r...... "" 1 0 0 1 CIudo I .. ,...... N N ..... 10 3B6B75 6057116 S JYJPCS 25.aII2OO2 '""" 2IW9I2OO2 9:44 23.75 10 3.3 11 3.3 3 ... SO 3 . 5 . 7'.3 95 11 ,. 3BO KO - P8Q, -...... - -...., N N ...... 10 385070 """""" S JYJPC. 2IW9I2OO2 ''':10 27""""'" 850 1G.7 12 3.3 11 3.3 5.1 5.2 SO , 0 7 . 19.7 0 138 158 '6 315.2 .K 0 3 6 1 - wind _3. 2OO2I03-, W_WhU_ SIu8t Lake s.tine WormIIIion 2002 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watenhed WhiteSturgeon Appendix3. Stuart Lake_ samplingdepIoymontand _'information Set Putl Set Sol Sol Total w_ Set w_ Pull DopIIIDopl/l Uno No. Sto Fish Voloclty FieldlITM(U_ Sot Pull EIIoIt Tomp Vlalbllll!Tomp VIolbllll) Min. Mu. Langth Number or Hook8 Hook Hook BaIt Hooko No. No. Sampling Captured M..urementVoIocIty Lake Station OPS "-I Sot 0... TIme TIme SoIT...1- Pull Date hro} (oC) (m) (oC) Im) Im) Im) Im) Set and SIZ8I _ Lcot Houro,Hook Total Houro T_ Fouled- FioohodErnci.ncVSilo DoocrIDtlon -.. Commonto «IN) ea:: c;;: Loc8J fm/a) Subetrate Zon4 SVIIOOtio Noarohoro (N) - Northlno 11.oJ12111...0 18111110 12101011I181111.oJ12101...0 111I) Mid (M) PSQ. -"". _L. 10 393390 II:I52S03 5 JYJPC5 26 PSO. 8etwMn Gt.f IIIInd & ...... L. 10 05 8048911 5 JYJPCS 27100/2002 10:30 2&0012002 11:15 24.75 11 3.3 11 3.3 25 2S2 120 6 6 6 . 149149 '49 149 2. ... 5K 1 0 2 1 PinchiPt.1dowtoGI.I "'-- S8CinNmIW trench N N GUI_' .... L. 10 39Ei883 804947. PSO. 5 JYJPCS 27100/2002 10:15 """"""" 11:25 25.2 11 3.3 11 3.3 ..7 11.4 120 6 . 7 . 151 126 17 151 24 804.8 6K 0 " ? 1 Pt. "'*- N N ....L. '0 _20 605097. 5 PSQ. JYJPC5 27100/2002 10:05 """"""" 11:35 25.5 11 3.3 11 3.3 5.3 6.1 80 , 0 7 . 25.5 0 179 204 16 405 SK 0 2 2 1 Between88- &then 0-.- 10..... N Y .... L. 10 394000 S PSQ, Between B8yM818nd & 00!52000 JYJPCS 27100/2002 9030 2&0012002 11:45 26.2 11 3.3 11 3.3 9.7 10.1 120 6 . 6 8 157 105 157 210 24 628.8 5K 0 0 3 ..... =' N Y PSO. .... L 10 400240 JYJPCS 27/09f2002 11:15 """"""'" 22.8 - 5 ,_ 11 3.3 11 3.3 6.2 ... 120 5 2 11 6 11. 45.. 251 137 2. 5472 5K 0 2 0 , Off.... Pinc:hi Pt. "'"""'" y N 28394.3 _3. 2IXI403 PrehIwy A8MIIm8nI at sun WIII8I'8h8cIWNte SUg80n Appendix 4 Summary of information relating to sturgeon captured in 2002 and associated by-catch of other species. Dote Pertaining to Capturod _goon 2002 Preliminary Assessment of Stuart Watershed White Sturgeon Appendix4: SturgeoncsptuJe Data DNA Sample lDcstIon and Msrtos: LP' left pectoral !in; RP' right pectoral fin Fish DIsposItion: B c baSICWCN1t-up;AU' adult underslzad; AO c aduM overslzad Tags: FL' Flay Tag; PT' PMTag; RT. Radio Tag; CT c can Tag FLOV Tag Colours: Y~Yfik1N. R=Red _Fleb~reclF"""_L.oka Co N Sfte Information Weht T InfonnaIIon ...... DaI8 d _d F.... T_ Snout DNA FI8b FIoyTog C_.. la", C."..... HookSlz Fl8h Captured from The 8tuMt Rivw; Both Recaptures From PI'8YIous Nechako Sampling re SiteInformltion Weht T I Information Forti T_ ",,",- DNA DaI801 Rlwrd .. Copture SexMat. Snout Orb.. Girth Fleh FIoyTog RadIoT"" Age Zonee....ng Northing Hooka", Length IAngth WeIght WeIght Age StlmpIo TogI. TogI. M_. 11...... PItT8g Code C8rtTIIIg Codl eom...... Fi.hNo. C_re C."..... - DopIII(m) Code Longt!I (cm) (lbI) Ikgol IYMrel D18p08tU Capture (YellowOf .rgoIlzal Froquancy -.. (cm) (cm) (cm) 1-....., on -- ..-- Blue) F_ No. 9/4102 StuoItR. SL49.8R 7.8 1410 145.0 187.0 37.0 17.0 58.0 48.0 21.8 no NlA 8-AO FT-PT LP 71 Healthy. but large hooktear,frames1.2, 1 hook no 1 Y I I 7F7BOB14SA damaOA_ 2 of the nsh frame 3 of Sturoeon Pt. 9(7102 StuartR. SL45.8L 10 ..oa7a 6001600 4.5 1410 191.0 213.0 48.0 21.0 70.0 118.0 43.2 na LP 8-AO FT-PT NlA LP LP y 419 7F7B031511 Has had no tU no othermarksor scars nl 2 FIR C8PtuNd From 8tuart Lake That Were Pl'8Ytoutly captuNd (lA. f8CIlXUf8I from preyioU8 N8chako NmpKng progr ). re Sb Inform8tkm hi T I tnformlltlon Forti T_ Snout ",,",- DNA D... d RIwr d CopIuro SIx 1181. FI8b FIoy Tog Age Zono E8Iting C.... HookS,," 0rbIta1 GIrth WeIght WeIght Ago SompIo TogI . TogI. 11-. 11...... pn"" RadIoTog _Tog .. S_ Northing Code Longt!I Longt!I Longt!I h Diopooltl (YellowOf Code Cods eom...... _.. FlohNo. C."..... DopIIIlm) Icm) (lbI) Ikgll (yoaro) (1oc:oIIon CapIuN -- CapIuN-- (largoolzal Froquancy Froquoncy No. (cm) (cml (cml .--. Iaken, on Blue) Gonads moderat. size, IIUttfoldingor lobbing. SLI0.M!179 8117102 Stuart L 10 401795 6048803 7.2 18/0 2 141.0 157.0 38.0 17.0 61.0 58.0 26.4 28-40+ LP B-AO M-N-N FT-PT.er RP LP R 2001 L 4240654209 148.32 4 78.6 4 SUrgeryscar on midline. FtIh released CD10u 2002 3 5.6048803 .w.2SOOE6047000N. Echo Val.- 137. Echo Del.. 23. Smooth scutes, ofd leer top ofcaudalfin,tear in SL 10.040024 5th dorsal acute; oktsurgecyacer.ovariessmokey 9128102 Stuart L. 10 400240 0048940 6.' 1410 12 182.0 0.6048940 210.5 49.0 22.0 79.5 115.0 52.3 nl 8-AO PT FT-PT-RT LP R 2004 L 7F7S0C6856 148.38 3 in colour. SOfMfolds, lobbing,eggs Imall, white, nl 8 18$&then O.5mm, -1/3 ventrll cavity filledby gonad. Fish rmeased 10U400025E 6OrC7300N Appendix 4. 2002103 Preliminary Assessment of Stuan Watershed White Sturgeon By-Catch Information 2002PreliminaryAssessment of Stuart Watershed WhiteSturgeon Appendix 4. Incidental (by-catch) fish capture data. Total Length Weight Hook Date Lake Station Zone Eastlng Northing Species Number (cm) (Ibs) Fate Size Comment 11-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 417535 6033167 NSC 1 38 Lived 11/0. 12-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 414830 6034402 NSC 1 47 Lived 11/0. 17-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 397731 6046786 BB 1 60 Lived NA 17-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 397731 6046786 BB 2 60 Died NA 25-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 390288 6053936 NSC 1 NA Lived 11/0. 25-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 385135 6056100 BB 1 -60 Lived 16/0. Fell off of boat 26-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 390026 6055940 NSC 1 46 Lived 11/0. Cauaht on Sockeve 26-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 389484 6057062 BB 1 78 Lived 11/0. Cauaht on Sauid 27-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 393390 6052903 NSC 1 46 Lived 14/0. Sockeve bait 28-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 396120 6050974 NSC 1 52 Lived 11/0. Sockeve bait 28-Seo-02 Stuart L. NIL 10 394000 6052000 NSC 1 42 Lived 11/0. Sauid bait Total Length Weight Hook Date River Station Zone Eastlng Northing Species Number (cm) (Ibs) Fate Size Comment 04-Sep.02 Stuart SL51.8L 10 457360 6003472 NSC 1 36 Lived 14/0 04-Seo-02 Stuart SL49.6R 10 456693 6002039 NSC 1 54 Lived 14/0 05-Sep-02 Stuart SL54.3R 10 455117 6003401 NSC 1 47 Lived 14/0 05-Seo-02 Stuart SL61.2L 10 448829 6005024 NSC 1 34 Lived 11.10 05-Sep.02 Stuart SL66.1L 10 444856 6005825 NSC 1 38 Lived 14/0 06-Seo-02 Stuart SL67.9R 10 443111 6006619 NSC 1 42 Lived 12.10 06-Sep.02 Stuart SL56.4R 10 453508 6003815 NSC 1 45 Lived 16/0 07-Seo-02 Stuart SL42.4R 10 463669 6001335 NSC 1 40 Lived 12.10 07-Seo-02 Stuart SL47.9R 10 458227 6002324 NSC 1 43 Lived 11.10 08-Sep.02 Stuart SL38.8L 10 466002 6000217 NSC 1 30 Lived 12.10 10-Seo-02 Stuart SL102.2L 10 419789 6024380 NSC 1 42 Lived 11.10 10-Sep.02 Stuart SL101.0L 10 419225 6023258 NSC 1 44 Lived 14/0 10-Sep-02 Stuart SL88.6R 10 425974 6014454 NSC 1 45 Lived 11.10 10-Seo-02 Stuart SL88.6R 10 425974 6014454 NSC 1 40 Lived 12.10 30-Sep.02 Stuart SL103.2L 10 419990 6025265 NSC 1 22.5 Died 14/0 Sauid bait 30-Seo-02 Stuart SL104.4 10 420071 6026424 NSC 1 36 Lived 11.10 Sockeve bait 06-Sep.02 Stuart AB49.6M 10 456700 6002034 NSC 1 28 Lived 3.10 08-Se0-02 Stuart AS37.3L NSC 1 38 Lived 3.10 08-Sep.02 Stuart AS37.3L NSC 2 44 Lived 6.10 09-Sep.02 Stuart AS109.6R 10 417466 6030523 NSC 1 35 Lived 5.10 09-Seo-02 Stuart AS109.6R 10 417466 6030523 NSC 2 46 Lived 5.10 Appendix 4. PreliminaryAssessmentofStuartWatershedWhiteSturgeon Appendix 5 Report on trials related to CARTtag/acoustic signal detection over a range of depths and distances from hydrophone and receiver. Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund CART Taa Ranae Tests methods Maximum Detectable Range of Acoustic (CART) Tag As referred to above, on October 16, 2002, the maximum detectable range of the acoustic portion of the CART tag was tested. The test tag was attached to a boat snap, which was suspended from a rope at depths ranging from 3 to 24 meters (Figure 3). The water depth at the site of testing was 30m and water temperature ranged from 8-9°C. The rope was anchored to the bottom and at the top was supported by an orange buoy. Using a Garmin GPS 12XL, the tags UTM coordinate was recorded. On the Lotek receiver, the gain was set fairly high at 75 (with a maximum being 99). This number was chosen strictly to set a standard. Weather conditions were windy, and the lake was rough, making the conditions for the test difficult. The best signal from the tag was received by the hydrophone when the unit was perpendicular to the water surface. The drifting of the boat interfered with the maintenance of the hydrophone in this position and the cord and hydrophone were attached to a weighted rope and suspended below the boat. For this test, other experiments and general tracking, the hydrophone was suspended to a depth of approximately 5m, except where shallower depths would not permit it. Due to the wind and time, testing at the 15m depth increment was skipped, and the test repeated for the 18m depth mark. To complete the test, the boat traveled away from the tag in open water, stopping periodically to drop the hydrophone and attempt to detect the tag. Distances between the anchored, suspended CART tag and the boat were confirmed using the GPS. When the distance was expanded to the point where the tag could not be detected, the boat moved towards the tag until it was again detected. This process was completed for tags suspended at the depths indicated on figure 3. Based on this experiment, it was determined that the detectable range of the CART tag increases with increasing tag depth. There are undoubtedly a number of other variables that could potentially affect the tags detectable range such as lake su,bstrate thermal stratification within the water column, suspended particulates, submerged structure (such as reefs), water temperature and likely other factors. This detectable range may vary over time as tag battery strength decreases. The CART 16_2 transmitter is rated as having 1215 days (3.4 years) of operating life based on a 5 second burst rate. Acoustic and Radio Telemetry Testing Appendix 5 pg. 1 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund 2000 :e 1800 c: .m C) 16 1600 fj c: -m 1400 c- E ~ ~ 1200 tU t) Cl) ~ 1000 E :J .5x 800 tU :2 600 3 6 9 12 15 18 CART Tag Depth Figure 3. Maximum detectable range of the CART tags with a fixed gain of 75 on the Lotek receiver and over a range of water depths. Maximum Distance to Code Out CARTTag methods Due to interference from both the weather and the tagged fish in the initial experiment described above, the procedure was repeated in an effort to determine the range over which the CART tag could not only be detected but also "coded out" at various gain settings. The gain was set in increments of 5, ranging from 5 to 50 and the test was repeated at two depths; a 6m shallow water tag and a 24m deep water set. This was performed in the same 30m trench as the assessments described above. Weather conditions were better, with no wind. As figure 4 indicates, it appears that the tags will code out at a greater distance when located deeper within the water column, which is supported by the findings in figure 3 above, where the tag coded out at 920m. Maximum Detectable Range of Radio Portion of CARTTag The abilityto track the radio portion of the CART tag (or standard radio tags) by boat within a lake environment appears to be very limited. Testing of radio signaling tags was conducted with the test tag set a depth of 6m. Using a gain of 45 to code out the tag, the maximum detectable distance was 60m. Using a gain of 80, and strictly attempting to detect the tag, the maximum distance at which it was located was 180m. This indicated that tracking the radio portion of the CARTtags or standard radio signa lingtags via boat is not likelyto be effective on a large body of water such as Stuart Lake. Acoustic and Radio Telemetry Testing Appendix 5 pg. 2 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund 1200 _ 6m Tag Depth r ,- - -,A-- - 24m Tag Depth 1000 .* -E - ,,,A** C) . tU 800 , I- ,, E '-0 600 u. Q) 0 c +-'tU 400 T ,A** en is 200 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Gain Figure4. Maximumdistanceto codeout CARTtagthroughrangeof "Gains"anddepths. Acoustic Telemetrv on Stuart Lake October 15 -17 Acoustic Telemetry Session Based on several informal tests performed during the field sampling conducted in September 2002, it was determined that the acoustic portion of the CART tags could be detected fairly easily using the hydrophone at a range of 1.5km. Based on this observation, a telemetry process was conducted on October 15, 2002 using a conservative, crude 1.2km2grid search pattern, assisted by a GPS. In three hours, two transect lines from the Tachie River to Battleship Island were completed, with 41 individual sampling sites (Figure 2). This equated to 55km of linear sampling. No fish were detected. On the morningof October 16th, it was decided to set up a maximum detectable range experiment to better confirm the tags capabilities, the results of which are discussed above. By coincidence, one of the CART tagged fish was detected during this experimental process. This turned out to be Code 5 (fish no. 4). The best estimate of this particular fishes location was UTM coordinate 10.411070. 6037902, approximately 1.5km south- east of Honeymoon Island. The fish was in about 20m of water, on a gradually sloping bottom with a 30m trench 1000m to the south-west and a shallow 6m bench BOOmto the north-east (Figure 2). As mentioned earlier, this fish was identified incidentally while testing another CART tag. Based on the experimental results of the CART tag detection assessment, the search pattern could safely support an expansion to improve the efficiency of tracking, and it was therefore cautiously increased in some areas to an average Acoustic and Radio Telemetry Testing Appendix 5 pg. 3 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund 1.5km. The exception to this search pattern occurred around points, islands and known reefs, where additional points may have been required to eliminate the risk of "missing" tag signals. Mid-afternoon on the 16th,the grid search pattern was resumed, and continued through the location of the Code 5 fish without deviation from the search pattern. The fish was detected 4 times, on two parallel transect lines spaced about 1.2km apart. On one of the 4 detections, the tag actually coded out. This was a reasonable test of the grid search concept, and also verified that it would be safe to increase the grid to a larger extent, closer to the 2km2 mark. A total of 25 sample sites were surveyed with the hydrophone over a 25 km linear transect (with extra locations around islands and points). The search was resumedon October 1th, and picked up where the previous days sampling was terminated. Soon into the search (by the third sample point in 3km), two signals were detected, and were both coded out to numbers 4 and 5. The remaining tracking efforts were required to determine the position of the two fish. The Code 5 fish, using a gain of 30 appeared to have moved into 12 meters of water overnight, and about 2.7km from the previous location at UTM 10.411189.6035147. The best estimate of the position of fish no. 3 (code 4) was at UTM 10.409602.6034795, also in 12m of water, and coded out at a gain of 35 (Figure 2). These UTM positions are only approximations based upon the above experiments. The potential error with the location of these two fish could range up to 300m. A secondexperimentwas performedon the 17th, and involvedthe testing of the CART tags ability to code out the two depths (6 and 24 meters) through a range of gain settings on the Lotek receiver (from 5 to 50). The results of this are discussed above. November 4 - 5 Acoustic Telemetry Session Based on the prior sessions results, the grid was expanded to about 1.7km2 on average and acoustic tracking was initiated on the morning of November 4thand continued for 4 hours. In that time, a total of 47 sites were sampled over 66 linear kilometers and one of the sturgeon was detected. This fish coded out immediately and subsequent sampling at reduced gains finally pin-pointed the approximate location. At a gain of 20, we picked up a strong signal that would not code out. With gain shifted up to 25, the fish immediately coded out to number 5, with a power of 91. The fish was identified as being located nearest to the UTM coordinate 10.408212.6036085, 3.5km NE of Sowchea Bay in approximately 20m of water (Figure 2). As observed in the experiment described below (Maximum Distance to Code out CART Tag), the CART tag at a depth of 24m did not code out until the gain was set at 25. Similarly, this fish in 20m of water would not code out until the gain was set to 25. Based on the previous Acoustic and Radio Telemetry Testing Appendix 5 pg. 4 Carrier Sekani Tribal Council Nechako White Sturgeon Recovery Initiative Habitat Conservation Trust Fund experimentation conducted with respect to tag detection/code determination, and distance, depth and gain settings, it is probable that the fish was within no more than 200m of the hydrophone. The other CARTtagged fish was not detected in this sampling area. Sampling resumed on November 5thand was initiated at Caesar Point and continued south-east through Pinchi Bay to Battleship Island, the cut-off point for the prior days sampling (Figure 2). On the return north-west transect, engine difficulties terminated this sampling session. No fish were detected. In total, 17 points were sampled over a 25km linear transect in 1.3hours. The sampling rate established during this tracking session, which included 64 points over 5.3 hours, produced a sampling rate of 12.1 sites per hour. Based on the tracking coverage achieved utilizingthe hydrophone during this process, the entire surface area of Stuart lake could theoretically be sampled in approximately 140 points, or 11.6 boat-hours assuming calm conditions, and using a grid not exceeding 2km2. This work would suggest that the deployment of CART tags on white sturgeon and their subsequent tracking/monitoring within Stuart lake utilizinga boat and hydrophone is a viable and potentially efficient means of tracking sturgeon in Stuart lake. Acoustic and Radio Telemetry Testing Appendix 5 pg. 5