Assessment of the Summer Sport Fishery for Walleye and Northern Pike at Smoke Lake, Alberta, 2003

CONSERVATION REPORT SERIES The Alberta Conservation Association is a Delegated Administrative Organization under Alberta’s Wildlife Act.

CONSERVATION REPORT

SERIES 25% Post Consumer Fibre When separated, both the binding and paper in this document are recyclable

Assessment of the Summer Sport Fishery for Walleye and Northern Pike at Smoke Lake, Alberta, 2003

Mike Blackburn Alberta Conservation Association #203, Provincial Building 111 – 54 Street Edson, Alberta, Canada T7E 1T2

Report Series Editor PETER AKU KELLEY J. KISSNER Alberta Conservation Association 59 Hidden Green NW #101, 9 Chippewa Rd Calgary, AB T3A 5K6 Sherwood Park, AB T8A 6J7

Conservation Report Series Type Data, Technical

ISBN printed: 978‐0‐7785‐7005‐9 ISBN online: 978‐0‐7785‐7006‐6 Publication No: T/175

Disclaimer: This document is an independent report prepared by the Alberta Conservation Association. The authors are solely responsible for the interpretations of data and statements made within this report.

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

Suggested Citation:

Blackburn, M. 2004. Assessment of the summer sport fishery for walleye and northern pike at Smoke Lake, Alberta, 2003. Data Report, D‐2004‐025, produced by Alberta Conservation Association, Edson, Alberta, Canada. 27 pp. + App.

Cover photo credit: David Fairless

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

To aid in the management and recovery of Alberta’s declining walleye and northern pike populations, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD) developed new management strategies for walleye and northern pike in 1995 and 1999, respectively. Smoke Lake, near Fox Creek, Alberta, was classified as having a stable walleye population from 1996 to 2000, which allowed sport anglers to harvest three walleye daily with a minimum size limit of 43 cm total length (TL). In 2000, ASRD adjusted the sport fishing regulations at Smoke Lake to a harvest of two fish over 50 cm TL because of high angling pressure and a potential conflict with walleye management at nearby Sturgeon Lake. From 1999 to 2003, the northern pike population was classified as a stable recreational fishery enabling sport anglers to a daily harvest of three pike with a minimum size limit of 63 cm TL.

In 2003, Alberta Conservation Association (ACA) and ASRD conducted a summer creel survey at Smoke Lake to collect data to evaluate the status of walleye and northern pike populations and to review sport fish regulations. Using angler interview data it was estimated that 2,142 anglers fished Smoke Lake for 4,126 h or 4.3 anglers‐h/ha. Angling pressure was lower in 2003 compared to a creel survey in 1998 by ACA when 2,326 anglers fished the lake for 6,869 h or 7.2 angler‐h/ha.

In 2003, an estimated six walleye were harvested at Smoke Lake with an estimated mean weight of 1.074 kg, resulting in an estimated yield of 0.007 kg/ha. Walleye yield declined in 2003 compared to 1998 when the estimated yield was 0.423 kg/ha. In 2003, anglers reported a release rate of walleye of 1.66 fish/h, resulting in an estimated release of 9,275 walleye. The estimated total yield (harvest + incidental mortality) of walleye was 525 or 0.361 kg/ha.

An estimated 24 northern pike were harvested at Smoke Lake in 2003 with an estimated mean weight of 1.730 kg, resulting in an estimated yield of 0.042 kg/ha. Estimated harvest and yield were lower in 2003 than in 1998 when 167 northern pike were harvested with a mean weight of 1.186 kg, resulting in an estimated yield of 0.207 kg/ha; however, the estimated weight increased. In 2003, anglers reported a release rate of

northern pike of 0.244 fish/h for a total of 516 northern pike. The estimated total yield of northern pike was 34 or 0.048 kg/ha.

In general, Smoke Lake had high densities of small walleye (< 50 cm TL) with a stable age‐class distribution, which was composed of slow‐growing fish that matured at a relatively young age. Based on criteria in the Walleye Management and Recovery Plan, the walleye population at Smoke Lake in 2003 was likely stable.

According to the Northern Pike Management and Recovery Plan, five of the nine criteria used to evaluate the status of northern pike populations indicated that Smoke Lake had a vulnerable northern pike population in 2003. The remaining four criteria indicated a collapsed pike population. The northern pike population at Smoke Lake could be classified as vulnerable‐to‐collapsed.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was funded by the Alberta Conservation Association (ACA). Additional funds were provided by Human Resources Development Canada through the Student Career Placement Program. In addition, the ACA received in‐kind support from Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD), Fisheries Management Division in Edson and Stony Plain. Special thanks to Bill Patterson, Fisheries Biologist (ACA), for providing continuous support with regards to the data analysis and report organization. Thanks to Craig Johnson, Fisheries Biologist (ACA), Calvin McLeod, East Slopes Business Unit Leader (ACA), and George Sterling, Area Fisheries Biologist (ASRD), for providing critical review of this report.

An essential contribution to this project were the creel clerks, Corey Rasmussen, Ingrid Van Herk, Lyndon Rempel, and Susan Parsons, who creeled Smoke Lake. Thanks to all the volunteer test anglers for donating their time and personal expense to this project. Thanks also to the town of Fox Creek for providing the creel clerks and test fishery volunteers with the use of the Smoke Lake campground free of charge.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iv TABLE OF CONTENTS...... v LIST OF FIGURES ...... vi LIST OF TABLES ...... vii LIST OF APPENDICES...... viii 1.0 INTRODUCTION...... 1 1.1 General introduction...... 1 1.2 Study rationale...... 2 2.0 STUDY AREA ...... 2 3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS...... 4 3.1 Survey design...... 4 3.2 Angler interviews...... 4 3.3 Test angling ...... 4 3.4 Biological fish data ...... 5 3.5 Data management and analysis ...... 5 4.0 RESULTS...... 7 4.1 Angler survey ...... 7 4.2 Walleye harvest and yield...... 10 4.3 Northern pike harvest and yield...... 13 4.4 Walleye sport fishery assessment ...... 15 4.5 Northern pike sport fishery assessment...... 21 5.0 REFERENCES ...... 25 6.0 APPENDICES ...... 28

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Location of Smoke Lake and the 2003 creel survey site...... 3 Figure 2. Flow chart outlining the process used for estimating parameters from the sport fishery at Smoke Lake, Alberta in 2003...... 6 Figure 3. Standardized probability density functions of the number of anglers at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003...... 8 Figure 4. Standardized probability density functions of total angler‐hours at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003...... 9 Figure 5. Standardized probability density functions of angling pressure at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003...... 9 Figure 6. Standardized probability density functions of the number of walleye harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003...... 10 Figure 7. Standardized probability density functions of the weight of walleye harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003 ...... 11 Figure 8. Standardized probability density functions of the yield (kg/ha) of walleye harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003...... 11 Figure 9. Standardized probability density functions of the number of released walleye during the sport fishery at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003...... 12 Figure 10. Standardized probability density functions of the number of northern pike harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003 ...... 13 Figure 11. Standardized probability density functions of the mean weight of northern pike harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003 ...... 14 Figure 12. Standardized probability density functions of the yield (kg/ha) of northern pike harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003...... 14 Figure 13. Age‐class distribution of walleye captured during the Fall Walleye Index Netting survey at Smoke Lake in 2003...... 16 Figure 14. Length‐at‐age of sport harvested and FWIN harvested walleye from Smoke Lake in 2003...... 17 Figure 15. Age‐at‐maturity of male walleye from Smoke Lake in 2003...... 18 Figure 16. Age‐at‐maturity of female walleye from Smoke Lake in 2003...... 18 Figure 17. Age‐class distribution of northern pike captured by sport anglers during the Smoke Lake creel survey in 2003...... 22 Figure 18. Length‐at‐age of northern pike captured by sport anglers during the Smoke Lake creel survey in 2003...... 22

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Summary of observed, reported, and estimated catch rates of anglers from summer surveys conducted at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003...... 8 Table 2. Walleye Management and Recovery Plan criteria used to evaluate status of the walleye fishery in Smoke Lake in 2003...... 20 Table 3. The Alberta Northern Pike Management Recovery Plan criteria used to evaluate the status of the northern pike fishery in Smoke Lake in 2003...... 24

vii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Schedule for the creel survey conducted on Smoke Lake in 2003...... 29 Appendix 2. Creel survey field form used at Smoke Lake in 2003...... 31 Appendix 3. Fork length‐total length relationships for walleye and northern pike captured during the FWIN survey at Smoke Lake in 2003...... 32 Appendix 4. Fork length‐weight relationships for walleye and northern pike captured during the FWIN survey at Smoke Lake in 2003...... 33 Appendix 5. Smoke Lake 2003 angler survey daily summary data...... 34 Appendix 6. Summaries of additional interview questions asked of each angler during the summer creel survey at Smoke Lake in 2003...... 35 Appendix 7. Biological data collected from sport angler harvested fish at Smoke Lake in the summer of 2003...... 37 Appendix 8. Dates, species, and fork lengths of fish captured during test angling, Smoke Lake; 2003...... 38 Appendix 9. Fall Walleye Index Netting data collected from Smoke Lake in 2003.. 48

viii

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 General introduction

Alberta’s walleye (Sander vitreus) and northern pike (Esox lucius) populations receive considerable fishing pressure (Sullivan 2003a). This can be attributed to a growing angler population exploiting fishing opportunities at a limited number of lakes. Prior to 1995, high numbers of anglers per lake (312.5 anglers/ha in the mid‐1990s) combined with high fish harvests resulted in the over‐harvest of many of Alberta’s fish populations (Sullivan 2003a). To aid in the recovery of Alberta’s walleye and northern pike populations, management strategies were developed by Alberta Sustainable Resource Development (ASRD) for walleye in 1995 (Alberta’s Walleye Management Recovery Plan, WMRP; Berry 1995) and for northern pike in 1999 (Alberta’s Northern Pike Management and Recovery Plan, NPMRP; Berry 1999). Using strategies identified in these management and recovery plans, each fish population was assessed and then assigned to one of four status categories – 1) collapsed, 2) vulnerable, 3) stable or 4) trophy.

In 1996, the WMRP was introduced and Smoke Lake was classified as a stable walleye fishery (Alberta Government 1996). This classification was based on results from historic creel surveys from 1974 to 1993 (ASRD, Edson File Data). A stable walleye classification permitted sport anglers to harvest three walleye daily with a minimum size limit of 43 cm total length (TL) (Berry 1995). In 1998, a summer creel survey was conducted by the Alberta Conservation Association (ACA) at Smoke Lake to evaluate the status of walleye (Kowalchuk and Davis 2000) and the population was again classified as stable. In 2000, ASRD made adjustments to the sport fishing regulations at Smoke Lake to reduce the daily harvest of walleye to two fish over 50 cm TL (Alberta Government 2000). These regulations were imposed because of the small size of Smoke Lake, high numbers of anglers, and the potential shift of angling pressure to Smoke Lake because of new restrictive walleye management at nearby Sturgeon Lake (Sterling pers. comm.).

After implementation of the NPMRP in 1999, a province‐wide northern pike sport fishing regulation was implemented classifying the majority of pike populations,

including Smoke Lake, as stable‐recreational fisheries (Berry 1999). This classification allowed sport anglers a daily harvest of three northern pike with a minimum size limit of 63 cm TL (Alberta Government 1999). In 1998, a summer creel survey was conducted at Smoke Lake by the ACA. The northern pike population was assessed using the NPMRP criteria and was classified as vulnerable but not at risk (Kowalchuk and Davis 2000). According to the NPMRP, northern pike populations managed as vulnerable should have a daily bag limit of one fish with a minimum size limit of 63 cm TL. However, the regulations were not changed at Smoke Lake after this assessment and the daily bag limit has remained at three northern pike with a minimum size of 63 cm TL (Alberta Government 2000, 2003).

1.2 Study rationale

Management plans for walleye and northern pike were designed to use creel survey data. Creel surveys are the preferred technique used to assess most sport fisheries in Alberta, because they are the least intrusive to the fishery and they can estimate fish harvest and angling pressure. ASRD fisheries managers suggest conducting creel surveys at walleye lakes every five years; thus Smoke Lake was due for a reassessment in 2003. ASRD also received pressure from members of the public to relax the size limits on walleye at Smoke Lake, and allow a more liberal harvest. As a result, ASRD and ACA conducted a creel survey on the lake in 2003 to collect data needed to evaluate the status of walleye and northern pike population and to review existing sport fish regulations.

2.0 STUDY AREA

Smoke Lake is located approximately 9 km southwest of Fox Creek, Alberta (Figure 1) and has a surface area of 959 hectares (ASRD, Edson file data). This eutrophic lake has a shoreline perimeter of about 14.7 km and an extensively forested drainage basin of 127 km2 (Mitchell and Prepas 1990). The major inlet, Smoke Creek, flows into Smoke Lake from the southeast. The lake is drained at its west end via an unnamed creek, which flows into the Little Smoky River, a major tributary of the Smoky River. Development at the lake consists of a day‐use area and campground on the northeast shore of the lake.

Smoke N Lake

# ## #

Edson Edmonton r e iv R y k /( o S m tle it L Fox Creek

S campground m (survey site) ok e C Smoke Lake re e k

4048Kilometers

Figure 1. Location of Smoke Lake and the 2003 creel survey site.

3.0 MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Survey design

A reduced effort creel survey (Pollock et al. 1994) was conducted from a single access point at Smoke Lake from 21 May to 17 August 2003 to collect angler effort and sport fishery data. Two creel clerks interviewed anglers as they returned from completed angling trips between 0800 and 2300 h on survey days. The creel survey was stratified into weekdays (Monday‐Friday) and weekend days (Saturday, Sunday, and statutory holidays). Surveys were conducted for five consecutive days during a 14‐day rotation, repeating this schedule seven times throughout the summer (Appendix 1).

3.2 Angler interviews

Upon returning to the survey access point, all angling parties were asked a series of questions regarding the number of hours fished, number of each species kept and released, the number of anglers, angling method, targeted species, use of electronics, age, use of barbless hooks and residence. Each angler was also asked to rate the quality of their overall fishing experience, with 1 = poor, 5 = average, and 10 = excellent. These data were recorded on a creel survey data form (Appendix 2). Creel clerks made a subjective evaluation of each angler’s skill level, and recorded the angler’s gender. Children and anglers that lacked equipment and knowledge regarding fishing were classified as novice. However, anglers that demonstrated clear superiority in equipment and knowledge (usually displaying sponsor emblems on their clothes and boats) were classified as professionals. All other anglers were considered to have moderate skill.

3.3 Test angling

Test angling was conducted during the survey period to collect information on age distributions and release rates of walleye and pike populations needed to determine the status of these populations. When restrictive size limits are in effect, creel attendants cannot collect biological data or record catch rates for fish smaller than the size limit. Test anglers included creel clerks, fisheries staff, and volunteers, all of varying skill levels, attempting to catch walleye and northern pike using lures, bait, and techniques

that sport anglers would normally use. Test anglers recorded the number of hours fished and the fork length (± 1 mm) of all fish caught. All fish caught during the test fishery were released. The ratio of legal‐length fish to protected‐length fish sampled during the test fishery was assumed to be equal to the corresponding ratio from the sport fishery (Sullivan 2003b). These ratios were compared to determine the angler exaggeration rate, and then used to estimate the total catch rates for walleye and northern pike. The mean weight of fish caught during the test fishery was applied to incidental mortality and total yield calculations. The catch rate calculated from the test fishery was not included in calculations regarding angler effort or pressure (anglers/ha).

3.4 Biological fish data

When permitted, creel clerks collected biological data from fish that were harvested by anglers. Data collected included fork length (FL, ± 1 mm), total weight (± 10 g), ageing structures, sex and state of maturity. Ageing structures collected included the left operculum and the first three rays of the left pelvic fin for walleye, the left cleithrum and the first three rays of the left pelvic fin for northern pike, and the left operculum and the anal fin for yellow perch. Ages were determined according to Mackay et al. (1990) by a minimum of two fisheries staff.

3.5 Data management and analysis

Field data were recorded on field data forms by creel clerks and then transcribed into Microsoft Excel by a professional data entry service using double entry verification. Prior to analysis, these data were verified by calculating frequency distributions of each creel survey parameter and using original data sheets and creel daily diaries to investigate and verify outliers. Biological data were verified by plotting weight‐length and length‐age graphs to identify and verify any outliers. Outliers were omitted if a measurement or recording error was suspected. These data are stored in the provincial database, Fisheries Management Information System (FMIS).

Standardized probability density functions of means generated using bootstrap methods (Haddon 2001) were used to estimate means and confidence intervals for the following parameters: angling effort, angling pressure, and the harvest and yield of walleye and northern pike. Protocols for calculating estimates from creel surveys follow Sullivan 5

(2004) and a flow chart describing these steps is presented in Figure 2. Estimates from this creel survey were compared to those from a previous ACA creel survey conducted in 1998 (Kowalchuk and Davis 2000). Statistical tests were not performed to compare the bootstrapped distributions between years.

Wkdy Mean # Wkdy Wkdy Obs Wkdy Hours Hours x Not Surveyed + Sum = Estimate +

Wknd Mean # Wknd Wknd Obs Wknd Hours Hours x + Not surveyed Sum = Estimate = Constant Total Effort Estimate

Likelihood Profile

Figure 2. Flow chart outlining the process used for estimating parameters from the sport fishery at Smoke Lake, Alberta in 2003. Circles represent parameters without variance (e.g., daily sums, counts, or totals), whereas rectangles or boxes represent values with probability density functions (e.g., a bootstrapped distribution of means for a parameter measured through the survey period like hours fished). Wknd Obs = weekend days observed; Wkdy Obs = weekdays observed. Bold outlined box represents the total estimate of a particular parameter (e.g. total effort, hours/hectare, total anglers, total harvest, or total yield) (modified from Patterson 2004).

Walleye hooking mortality, or incidental mortality, was determined for walleye at Smoke Lake, as suggested by Reeves (2004), using a multivariate analysis which included date of capture, water temperature, capture depth, and fishing method. The resulting estimate for incidental mortality (5.6%) was applied to the estimated number of fish released by anglers (i.e., fish released X 5.6%). This estimate was then combined with the angler harvest estimate to determine a total harvest (fish harvested + incidental mortality).

Gini coefficients and angler success rates were calculated to assess catch inequality (catch variation) for the northern pike population according to Baccante (1995). The Gini coefficient varies between 0 and 1; 0 indicates all anglers caught an equal number of fish and 1 indicates that all fish were captured by one person.

Proportional stock density (PSD) and relative stock density (RSD) values were calculated for northern pike using total lengths and the size categories suggested by Gablehouse (1984). The PSD is the number of northern pike harvested ≥ 53 cm TL, as a proportion of those that are ≥ 35 cm TL. A high PSD value indicates a high quality fishery. The RSD (stock‐quality) is the proportion of harvested northern pike between 35 and 52.9 cm TL relative to the number of pike ≥ 35 cm TL. Since northern pike < 63 cm TL were released by sport anglers (protected‐length), total length measurements of pike caught in the test fishery were used for these calculations.

Fall Walleye Index Netting (FWIN) survey data was collected at Smoke Lake in 2003. FWIN is a standardized method used to collect biological, abundance, and size structure data of walleye fisheries (Morgan 2000). These data were used to calculate fork length‐ total length (Appendix 3) and fork length‐weight (Appendix 4) relationships. These relationships were then applied to the fork lengths of walleye and northern pike captured during the test fishery to calculate total lengths and weights of these fish.

4.0 RESULTS

4.1 Angler survey

In 2003, 835 anglers were interviewed at Smoke Lake between 21 May and 17 August (Table 1). Angler interview summaries can be found in Appendices 5 and 6. An estimated 2,142 anglers (95% CI = 1,858 ‐ 2,428; Figure 3) fished Smoke Lake in 2003, corresponding to an estimated effort of 4,126 angler‐h (95% CI = 3,360 ‐ 4,942; Figure 4) or 4.3 angler‐h/ha (95% CI = 3.5 ‐ 5.2; Figure 5). Angling pressure in 2003 was lower than that estimated in 1998 when 2,326 anglers (95% CI = 2,049 ‐ 2,639; Figure 3) fished the lake corresponding to 6,869 angler‐h (95% CI = 5,953 ‐ 7,825; Figure 4) or 7.2 h/ha (95% CI = 6.2 ‐ 8.2; Figure 5).

Table 1. Summary of observed, reported, and estimated catch rates of anglers from summer surveys conducted at Smoke Lake in 1998 and 2003.

Creel Data 19981 2003 # days surveyed 36 34 # anglers interviewed 958 835 # angling hours reported 2844 2114.75 Walleye Data Kept/angler‐h 0.060 0.001 Released/angler‐h 1.262 1.664 Observed total/angler‐h 1.322 1.665 Northern Pike Data Kept/angler‐h 0.024 0.004 Released/angler‐h 0.101 0.244 Observed total/angler‐h 0.125 0.248 Yellow Perch Data Kept/angler‐h (1998 n=34; 2003 n=3) 0.012 0.001 Released/angler‐h (1998 n=16; 2003 n=0) 0.006 None 1Data is from Kowalchuk and Davis (2000)

Smoke Lk. Creel 2003 1.2 Smoke Lk. Creel 1998 Density 1 0.8 0.6 Probability 0.4 0.2 0

Standardized 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

Number of anglers

Figure 3. Standardized probability density functions of the number of anglers at Smoke Lake in 1998 (Maximum Likelihood Estimate, MLE = 2,326 anglers, 95% CI = 2,049 ‐ 2,639) and 2003 (MLE = 2,142, 95% CI = 1,858 ‐ 2,428).

Smoke Lk. Creel 2003 Smoke Lk. Creel 1998 1.2 Density 1 0.8 0.6 Probability 0.4 0.2 0

Standardized 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

Total angler‐hours (hours)

Figure 4. Standardized probability density functions of total angler‐hours at Smoke Lake in 1998 (Maximum Likelihood Estimate, MLE = 6,869 angler‐h, 95% CI = 5,953 ‐ 7,825) and 2003 (MLE = 4,126, 95% CI = 3,360 ‐ 4,942).

Smoke Lk. Creel 2003 Smoke Lk. Creel 1998 1.2 Density 1 0.8 0.6 Probability 0.4 0.2 0

Standardized 012345678910

Angling pressure (hours/hectare)

Figure 5. Standardized probability density functions of angling pressure at Smoke Lake in 1998 (Maximum Likelihood Estimate, MLE = 7.2 h/ha, 95% CI = 6.2 ‐ 8.2) and 2003 (MLE = 4.3 h/ha, 95% CI = 3.5 ‐ 5.2).

4.2 Walleye harvest and yield

An estimated six walleye were harvested from Smoke Lake in 2003 (95% CI = 3 – 9; Figure 6). Biological data collected from harvested walleye are provided in Appendix 7. Harvested walleye had an estimated mean weight of 1.074 kg (95% CI = 0.885 – 1.265; Figure 7); therefore the estimated yield of walleye harvested by anglers was 0.007 kg/ha (95% CI = 0.003 ‐ 0.011; Figure 8). Estimates for walleye harvest and yield in 2003 were lower compared to 1998 when an estimated 404 walleye (95% CI = 326 – 494; Figure 6) with a mean weight of 1.004 kg (95% CI = 0.932 – 1.080; Figure 7) were harvested from the lake, resulting in a yield of 0.423 kg/ha ( 95% CI = 0.332 ‐ 0.527; Figure 8). This decline can be partially attributed to the increased size limit implemented in 2000 (Alberta Government 2000), which required anglers to release walleye (< 50 cm TL) that were harvestable in 1998.

Smoke Lk. Creel 2003 1.2 Smoke Lk. Creel 1998 Density 1 0.8 0.6 Probability

0.4 0.2 0

Standardized 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Number of walleye harvested

Figure 6. Standardized probability density functions of the number of walleye harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 (Maximum Likelihood Estimate, MLE = 404 walleye, 95% CI = 326 ‐ 494) and 2003 (MLE = 6 walleye, 95% CI = 3 ‐ 9).

Smoke Lk. Creel 2003 Smoke Lk. Creel 1998 1.2 Density 1 0.8 0.6 Probability 0.4 0.2 0

Standardized 0 500 1000 1500 2000

Weight of harvested walleye (g)

Figure 7. Standardized probability density functions of the weight of walleye harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 (Maximum Likelihood Estimate, MLE = 1.004 kg, 95% CI = 0.932 – 1.080) and 2003 (MLE = 1.074 kg, 95% CI = 0.885 – 1.265).

Smoke Lk. Creel 2003 Smoke Lk. Creel 1998 1.2 1 Density

0.8 0.6

Probability 0.4 0.2 0 Standard 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Yield of walleye harvest (kg/ha)

Figure 8. Standardized probability density functions of the yield (kg/ha) of walleye harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 (Maximum Likelihood Estimate, MLE = 0.423 kg/ha, 95% CI = 0.332 ‐ 0.527) and 2003 (MLE = 0.007 kg/ha, 95% CI = 0.003 ‐ 0.011).

Anglers reported a release rate for walleye of 1.66 fish/h resulting in an estimated release of 9,275 protected‐length walleye (Figure 9). According to Sullivan (2003b), angler exaggeration of walleye catch rates is negatively correlated with the release rate. Since the release rate reported by anglers during this survey was high, anglers likely did not exaggerate their catch. Sullivan (2003b) reported an exaggeration factor of 1.2 at Smoke Lake in 1998. Therefore, if anglers exaggerated their catch at Smoke Lake, it was likely of little consequence. Compared to 1998 (9,131 fish; 95% CI = 7,325 ‐ 11,061), the estimated release of walleye in 2003 has remained relatively the same (Figure 9).

Smoke Lake Creel 2003 Smoke Lake Creel 1998 1.2 Density 1 0.8 0.6 Probability 0.4 0.2 0

Standardized 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000

Number of walleye released

Figure 9. Standardized probability density functions of the number of released walleye during the sport fishery at Smoke Lake in 1998 (MLE = 9,131 fish; 95% CI = 7,325 ‐ 11,061) and 2003 (MLE = 9,275, 95% CI = 7,311 ‐ 11,482).

Combining the estimate for incidental mortality of walleye (released fish X 5.6%) with and estimated mean weight of 0.655 kg (based on the test fishery) for released walleye, the incidental mortality of walleye associated with the sport fishery was estimated to be 519 walleye or 0.355 kg/ha. Therefore, the total sport yield of walleye (harvest + incidental mortality) was estimated to be 525 walleye (0.361 kg/ha).

4.3 Northern pike harvest and yield

In 2003, an estimated 24 northern pike were harvested at Smoke Lake (95% CI = 15 ‐ 34; Figure 10). Biological data collected from harvested northern pike is provided in Appendix 7. The mean weight of harvested northern pike was 1.730 kg (95% CI = 1.357 – 2.208; Figure 11), resulting in an estimated yield of 0.042 kg/ha (95% CI = 0.025 ‐ 0.065; Figure 12). The estimates for harvest and yield in 2003 were lower than those in 1998 when an estimated 167 pike (95% CI = 121 – 218) were harvested and estimated yield was 0.207 kg/ha (95% CI = 0.149 ‐ 0.274). However, the estimated mean weight of pike was higher in 2003 compared to 1998 (1.186 kg; 95% CI = 1.054 – 1.337). Differences in harvest and yield are likely a result of the implementation of a minimum size limit (63 cm) in 1999 (Alberta Government 1999), which required anglers to release all northern pike less than 63 cm TL.

Smoke Lk. Creel 2003 1.2 Smoke Lk. Creel 1998 Density 1 0.8 0.6 Probability 0.4 0.2 0

Standardized 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Number of northern pike harvested

Figure 10. Standardized probability density functions of the number of northern pike harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 (Maximum Likelihood Estimate, MLE = 167 pike, 95% CI = 121 ‐ 218) and 2003 (MLE = 24 pike, 95% CI = 15 ‐ 34).

Smoke Lk. Creel 2003 Smoke Lk. Creel 1998 1.2 Density 1 0.8 0.6 Probability 0.4 0.2 0

Standardized 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Mean weight of northern pike (g)

Figure 11. Standardized probability density functions of the mean weight of northern pike harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 (Maximum Likelihood Estimate, MLE = 1.186 kg, 95% CI = 1.054 – 1.337) and 2003 (MLE = 1.730 kg, 95% CI = 1.357 – 2.208).

Smoke Lk. Creel 2003 Smoke Lk. Creel 1998 1.2 Density 1 0.8 0.6 Probability 0.4 0.2 0

Standardized 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4

Yield of northern pike harvest (kg/ha)

Figure 12. Standardized probability density functions of the yield (kg/ha) of northern pike harvested at Smoke Lake in 1998 (Maximum Likelihood Estimate, MLE = 0.207 kg/ha, 95% CI = 0.149 ‐ 0.274) and 2003 (MLE = 0.042 kg/ha; 95% CI = 0.025 ‐ 0.065). 14

Anglers reported releasing 516 northern pike for a release rate of 0.244 fish/h. This release rate is likely exaggerated, because the northern pike total catch rate was very low (Sullivan 2003b). Applying the ratio of protected‐length to legal‐length northern pike sampled during the test fishery (Appendix 8), the estimated release rate was 0.099 fish/h resulting in an estimated 210 pike released. This result suggests that anglers exaggerated their release rate for northern pike by more than 2 times.

Combining a conservative estimate for incidental mortality of 5%, an exaggeration rate of 2.5, and a mean weight of 0.775 kg (based on the test fishery), the incidental mortality of northern pike associated with the sport fishery was estimated to be 11 pike or 0.006 kg/ha. Therefore, the total sport yield (harvest + incidental mortality) of northern pike during the 2003 survey was estimated to be 34 pike or 0.048 kg/ha.

4.4 Walleye sport fishery assessment

Since harvestable walleye only included walleye longer than 50 cm TL and no age structures were collected during the test fishery, data collected during the 2003 Fall Walleye Index Netting (FWIN) survey (Appendix 9) were used to assess walleye age‐ class distribution, age‐class stability, length‐at‐age, and age‐at‐maturity.

4.4.1 Age‐class distribution and stability

In 2003, walleye displayed a wide age‐class distribution with 11 age‐classes being represented with a mean age of 6.2 y (Figure 13). There was no evidence of recruitment or year class failures in this population, and the fishery was supported by more than 1 to 3 age‐classes; therefore the age‐class stability was considered relatively stable. According to the WMRP, the age‐class distribution and stability of the population indicated a stable walleye population at Smoke Lake in 2003.

10 (walleye/net) rate 5 catch

Total 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Age (years)

Figure 13. Age‐class distribution of walleye captured during the Fall Walleye Index Netting survey at Smoke Lake in 2003. Mean age = 6.2 (n = 249).

4.4.2 Length‐at‐age

Growth rate of walleye was very slow. All walleye captured were < 50 cm FL. Walleye grew to 45 cm FL in 7 to 9 y (Figure 14). According to the WMRP, this growth rate indicates a trophy walleye population.

4.4.3 Catch Rate

The total walleye catch rate reported by sport anglers was 1.67 fish/h. The reported catch rate of two legal‐length walleye (harvested) was very low at 0.0009 fish/h, with a similar harvest rate of one protected‐length walleye at 0.0005 fish/h. In contrast, the reported release rates were high at 1.66 fish/h. According to the WMRP, the total reported catch rate indicates a stable fishery, but the reported catch rate of legal‐length walleye (> 50 cm TL) indicates a collapsed fishery. Based on age‐at‐maturity and the high productivity of small walleye, these catch rates are more indicative of a stable fishery (Berry 1995).

600

500

400

300

length (mm) 200 Smoke Lk. FWIN 2003 Fork 100 Smoke Lk. creel 2003 Log. (Smoke Lk. FWIN 2003) 0 0123456789101112131415

Age (years)

Figure 14. Length‐at‐age of sport harvested and FWIN harvested walleye from Smoke Lake in 2003. Logarithmic line‐of‐best‐fit: r2 = 0.80, n = 253.

4.4.4 Age‐at‐maturity

In 2003, all male walleye were mature by age‐6; however the earliest age when maturity was confirmed was age‐4 (Figure 15). The mean age of mature male walleye was 6 y. All female walleye were mature at age‐8 (Figure 16), with the youngest females maturing by age‐3. The mean age of mature females was 8 y. According to the WMRP, both female and male walleye have a mean age‐at‐maturity that corresponds to a vulnerable fishery (Berry 1995).

Mature males Immature males 10

(walleye/net) 4 rate 2 Catch 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Age (years)

Figure 15. Age‐at‐maturity of male walleye from Smoke Lake in 2003. Mean age = 6 y (n = 124).

Mature females Immature females 7 6 5 4 (walleye/net) 3 rate 2 1 Catch 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Age (years)

Figure 16. Age‐at‐maturity of female walleye from Smoke Lake in 2003. Mean age = 8 y (n = 58).

4.4.5 Stock classification

According to the WMRP, there was some variation in the status of the walleye population at Smoke Lake in 2003 (Table 2). Of the five criteria used to assess status of Alberta walleye populations, two (age‐class distribution, age‐class stability) indicated a stable population, one (length‐at‐age) indicated a trophy population, one (age‐at‐ maturity) indicated a vulnerable population, and one (catch rate) indicated both a stable and collapsed population. In general, Smoke Lake had high densities of small walleye (< 50 cm TL) that had a stable age‐class distribution, which was composed of slow‐ growing, moderately slow‐maturing fish. Based on these criteria, the walleye population at Smoke Lake in 2003 was likely stable.

Table 2. Walleye Management and Recovery Plan criteria used to evaluate status of the walleye fishery in Smoke Lake in 2003. Grey areas indicate current status of each criterion. Bold type in grey areas are values used to determine the criteria status. Fish measurements, fork length (FL) and total length (TL) were indicated in parentheses. Italicized type in brackets indicates which data were used for each metric. Catch rate total includes fish kept and released.

Metric Trophy Stable Vulnerable Collapsed 1Age‐class Wide Wide Narrow Narrow or wide distribution 8 or more age‐ ≥ 8 age classes 1‐3 age classes Mean age classes mean age = 6 – 9 mean age = 4 ‐ 6 = 6 ‐ 10 mean age > 9 11 age‐classes, few old (> 10 y) mean age = 6.2 fish 1Age‐class Very Stable Relatively Unstable Stable or stability 1‐2 age‐classes Stable 1‐3 age‐classes unstable out of smooth 2‐3 age‐classes support fishery recruitment catch curve out of smooth failures catch curve Stable 1Length‐at‐ Very slow Slow Moderate Fast Age 50 cm (FL) in 50 cm (FL) in 50 cm (FL) in 50 cm (FL) in 12 – 15 y 9 – 12 y 7 – 9 y 4 – 7 y 50 cm in > 12 y 2Catch Rate Total = > 2/h Total = > 1/h Total = 0.5 ‐ 1/h Total = < 0.1 > 50 cm (TL max) > 50 cm (TL > 50 cm (TL max) >50 cm (TL max) =>1/h max) = > 0.3/h = < 0.3/h = < 0.02/h Total CUE = > 50 cm (TL max) 1.66/h = 0.0009/h 1Age‐at‐ Female: 10 ‐ 20 Female: 8 ‐ 10 Female: 7 ‐ 8 Female: 4 ‐ 7 Maturity Male: 10 ‐ 16 Male: 7 – 9 Male: 5 – 7 Male: 3 – 6 Female mean = 8; Males mean = 6 1Data from Fall Walleye Index Netting 2Data from creel survey

4.5 Northern pike sport fishery assessment

The status of the northern pike sport fishery was evaluated using the stock classification listed in the NPMRP (Berry 1999) and criteria listed in Sullivan (1998).

4.5.1 Catch rate

The total reported catch rate of northern pike during the creel survey in 2003 was 0.248 fish/h. The observed catch rate of the nine legal‐length northern pike (≥ 63 cm TL) harvested was 0.004 fish/h, with a reported release rate of 0.244 fish/h. According to the NPMRP, the catch rate of harvested northern pike (≥ 63 cm TL) corresponds to a collapsed pike fishery, whereas the total catch rate indicates a vulnerable pike fishery. After calculating the exaggeration rate (Sullivan 2003b), the estimated total catch rate for northern pike was 0.103 fish/h, which indicates a vulnerable pike fishery on the verge of collapse.

4.5.2 Age‐class distribution

The age‐class distribution of northern pike harvested during the sport fishery ranged from 6 to 10 y (Figure 17). There were no age‐9 fish and no measurable age‐classes (i.e., catch rate > 0.002 fish/h). According to the NPMRP, the age‐class distribution corresponds to a collapsed northern pike fishery.

4.5.3 Length‐at‐age

Growth rate of northern pike was relatively fast with northern pike reaching 63 cm TL (59.3 cm FL) by age‐6 (Figure 18; Appendix 3). In 1998, northern pike were 8 y of age before they grew to 63 cm TL (Kowalchuk and Davis 2000). According to the NPMRP, the growth rate of northern pike in 2003 indicates a vulnerable (low risk) population.

0.002

0.0015

0.001 (northern pike/hour) 0.0005

0 Catch Rate 0123456789101112131415

Age (years)

Figure 17. Age‐class distribution of northern pike captured by sport anglers during the Smoke Lake creel survey in 2003. Mean age = 7.4 y, n = 10.

Smoke Lk. Creel 2003 Log. (Smoke Lk. Creel 2003) 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 Length (mm) 300

Fork 200 100 0 01234567891011

Age (years)

Figure 18. Length‐at‐age of northern pike captured by sport anglers during the Smoke Lake creel survey in 2003. Logarithmic line‐of‐best‐fit: r2 = 0.63, n = 10.

4.5.4 Mean weight

The mean weight of northern pike ≥ 63 cm TL from the creel survey and test fishery was 1.7 kg (n = 9) and 2.1 kg (n = 2), respectively. According to the NPMRP, these mean weight values can indicate a collapsed or a stable northern pike population; however since catch rates were very low and length‐at‐age is increasing, it is more likely that these values indicate a collapsed population (Berry 1999).

4.5.5 Proportional and relative stock density

According to the NPMRP, both the PSD and RSD (stock‐quality) values indicate a vulnerable (low risk) northern pike population as only 14% of the pike captured were considered “quality” fish (Gablehouse 1984).

4.5.6 Angler success rate and Gini coefficient

Only 1% of anglers interviewed at Smoke Lake in 2003 were successful in catching one or more pike ≥ 63 cm TL (legal‐length). The Gini coefficient was 0.84 indicating a high level of inequality in the catch of northern pike (Baccante 1995). According to the NPMRP, the angler success rate indicates a collapsed northern pike population, whereas the Gini coefficient indicates a vulnerable population.

4.5.7 Stock Classification

Estimates for five (CUE total, length‐at‐age, PSD, RSD, Gini coefficient) of the nine criteria in the NPMRP used to classify northern pike populations indicate Smoke Lake had a vulnerable northern pike population (Table 3). The remaining four criteria (CUE kept, measurable age‐classes, mean weight, % success) indicate a collapsed pike population. Generally, the northern pike population at Smoke Lake in 2003 could be classified as a vulnerable population on the verge of collapse (Berry 1999).

Table 3. The Alberta Northern Pike Management Recovery Plan criteria used to evaluate the status of the northern pike fishery in Smoke Lake in 2003. Grey areas indicate current status of each criterion. Bold type in grey areas are values obtained in 2003 to determine these ratings. Catch rate (CUE) total includes pike kept and release where CUE kept includes only pike ≥ 63 total length (TL).

Vulnerable Vulnerable Metric Stable (No Risk) (Low Risk) Collapsed 1CUE kept > 0.8 > 0.3 > 0.1 < 0.1 (≥ 63 cm TL) 0.004 pike/h 1CUE total 1 – 2 0.5 – 1 0.2 ‐ 0.5 < 0.2 0.248 pike/h 1# Measurable age‐classes 7 – 12 3 – 7 1 – 2 Almost none (> 0.002/h) none 1,2Length‐at‐age Slow Increasing Increasing Fast Size limit at 6 y 1Mean Weight (kg) 1 – 2 < 1 0.5 – 1.5 0.5 – 3.5 (≥ 63 cm TL) 1.7 3PSD > 40 < 40 Variable Variable (% pike > 53 cm TL max) (> 0.1 pike/h) (< 0.1 pike/h) 14% 3RSD < 50 > 50 Variable Variable (% pike 35 ‐ 52 cm TL max, (> 0.1/h) (< 0.1 / h) stock – quality size) 77% 1% Success > 70 < 70 < 40 < 20 (% anglers catching 1 or more 1% legal‐size pike) 1Gini 0.3 0.5 – 0.7 0.7 – 0.9 > 0.9 (total CUE; catch inequality) 0.84 1Creel survey data 2FWIN data 3Test angling data

5.0 REFERENCES

Alberta Government. 1996. 1996 guide to Alberta sportfishing regulations. Alberta Environmental Protection, Natural Resources Services, Edmonton, Alberta. 63 pp.

Alberta Government. 1999. 1999 guide to Alberta sportfishing regulations. Alberta Environmental Protection, Natural Resources Services, Edmonton, Alberta. 92 pp.

Alberta Government. 2000. 2000 guide to Alberta sportfishing regulations. Alberta Environmental Protection, Natural Resources Services, Edmonton, Alberta. 92 pp.

Alberta Government. 2003. 2003 guide to Alberta sportfishing regulations. Alberta Environmental Protection, Natural Resources Services, Edmonton, Alberta. 92 pp.

Baccante, D. 1995. Assessing catch inequality in walleye angling fisheries. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 15: 661‐665.

Berry, D.K. 1995. Alberta’s walleye management and recovery plan. Alberta Environment Protection, Natural Resources Service, Number T/310, Edmonton, Alberta. 32 pp.

Berry, D.K. 1999. Alberta’s northern pike management and recovery plan. Alberta Environment Protection, Natural Resources Service, Number T/459, Edmonton, Alberta. 22 pp.

Gablehouse, D. 1984. A length‐categorization system to assess fish stocks. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 4: 273‐285.

Haddon, M. 2001. Modeling and quantitative methods in fisheries. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, Florida. 406 pp.

Kowalchuk, S., and C. Davis. 2000. Assessment of the status of the sport fishery for walleye and northern pike, and statistics for yellow perch at Smoke Lake, summer 1998. Produced by the Alberta Conservation Association, Edson, Alberta, Canada. 30 pp.

Mackay, W.C., G.R. Ash, and H.J. Norris (eds.). 1990. Fish ageing methods for Alberta. R.L.&L. Environmental Services Ltd. in association with Alberta Fish and Wildlife Division and University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta. 113 pp.

Mitchell, P. and Prepas. 1990. Atlas of Alberta lakes. The University of Alberta Press, Edmonton, Alberta. 675 pp.

Morgan, G.E. 2000. Fall Walleye Index Netting (FWIN) manual of instructions. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Sudbury, Ontario. 35 pp.

Patterson, B. 2004. Assessment of the summer sport fishery for walleye and northern pike at Pigeon Lake, 2003. Data report, D‐2004‐015, produced by the Alberta Conservation Association, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. 55 pp.

Pollock, K.H., C.M. Jones, and T.L. Brown. 1994. Angler survey methods and their applications in fisheries management. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 25. 371 pp.

Reeves, K.A. 2004. Hooking mortality of walleye caught by anglers on Mille Lacs Lake, Minnesota in 2003. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Section of Fisheries. 16 pp.

Sterling, G.L. 2004. Area Fisheries Biologist. Fish and Wildlife Division, Edson, Alberta. (Pers. comm.)

Sullivan, M.G. 2004. Computer simulation of sport fishery parameters. Alberta Fish and Wildlife Division Memorandum. 16 pp.

Sullivan, M.G. 2003a. Active management of walleye fisheries in Alberta: dilemmas of managing recovering fisheries. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 23: 1343‐1358.

Sullivan, M.G. 2003b. Exaggeration of walleye catches by Alberta anglers. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 23: 573‐580.

Sullivan, M.G. 1998. Northern management classification criteria for Alberta. Alberta Fish and Wildlife Division Memorandum.

6.0 APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Schedule for the creel survey conducted on Smoke Lake in 2003. Grey areas indicate days when the lake was surveyed.

May 2003

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

1 2 3

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Smoke Lk Days off Days off Days off Days off Days off Iosegun Lk

June 2003

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Smoke Lk Days off Days off Days off Days off Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Smoke Lk Days off Days off Days off Days off Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk 29 30 Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk

Appendix 1. Continued

July 2003

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

1 2 3 4 5 Iosegun Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Smoke Lk Days off Days off Days off Days off Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Smoke Lk Days off Days off Days off Days off Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk 27 28 29 30 31 Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Smoke Lk

August 2003

Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday

1 2 Smoke Lk Smoke Lk 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Days off Days off Days off Days off Iosegun Lk 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Iosegun Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk Smoke Lk 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Smoke Lk 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Appendix 2. Creel survey field form used at Smoke Lake in 2003.

Appendix 3. Fork length‐total length relationships for walleye and northern pike captured during the FWIN survey at Smoke Lake in 2003.

Walleye; FWIN 2003 Linear (Walleye; FWIN 2003) 600 500

(mm) 400 300

Length 200 y = 1.0643x + 3.1196 R2 = 0.9974

Total 100 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Fork Length (mm)

Northern pike; FWIN 2003 Linear (Northern pike; FWIN 2003) 1000

800 (mm) 600

400 Length y = 1.0401x + 12.409 200 R2 = 0.9996 Total 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Fork Length (mm)

Appendix 4. Fork length‐weight relationships for walleye and northern pike captured during the FWIN survey at Smoke Lake in 2003.

Walleye; FWIN 2003 1400 Power (Walleye; FWIN 2003) 1200 1000

(g) 800 600

Weight 400 y = 5E‐06x3.1529 2 200 R = 0.9926 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Fork Length (mm)

Northern pike; FWIN 2003 Power (Northern pike; FWIN 2003) 5000

4000

(g) 3000

2000 Weight y = 8E‐06x2.975 1000 R2 = 0.9906 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000

Fork Length (mm)

Appendix 5. Smoke Lake 2003 angler survey daily summary data. Codes: WALL = walleye; NRPK = northern pike; YLPR = yellow perch; K = kept; R = released.

WALL WALL NRPK NRPK YLPR YLPR Month Day Anglers Hours K R K R K R 5 21 7 15 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 22 2 3.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 23 11 34 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 24 53 137.75 1 29 2 18 0 0 5 25 19 67 0 35 0 20 0 0 6 4 24 69 0 94 1 46 0 0 6 5 14 25.5 0 8 0 10 0 0 6 6 39 122.75 0 34 1 54 0 0 6 7 68 181.75 0 18 0 42 0 0 6 8 22 78 0 40 1 55 2 0 6 18 19 33.5 0 44 0 27 0 0 6 19 12 43 0 91 0 9 0 0 6 20 10 26 0 72 0 4 0 0 6 21 12 18.5 0 43 0 8 0 0 6 22 5 8 1 2 0 1 0 0 7 2 25 68 0 321 0 2 0 0 7 3 20 50 0 135 1 5 1 0 7 4 24 51.25 0 78 0 71 0 0 7 5 5 16 0 19 0 4 0 0 7 6 5 19 0 6 0 6 0 0 7 16 27 60.5 0 127 1 21 0 0 7 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 18 26 33.25 0 163 0 2 0 0 7 19 74 150.75 0 376 0 18 0 0 7 20 29 95.5 1 183 0 11 0 0 7 31 16 41 0 70 0 5 0 0 8 1 19 33.5 0 25 0 8 0 0 8 2 80 212.5 0 570 0 22 0 0 8 3 70 115 0 292 1 5 0 0 8 4 51 160 0 269 1 22 0 0 8 14 19 60 0 183 0 7 0 0 8 15 18 65.75 0 158 0 9 0 0 8 16 6 8 0 18 0 1 0 0 8 17 3 11.5 0 17 0 1 0 0 Total 835 2114.75 3 3520 9 516 3 0

Appendix 6. Summaries of additional interview questions asked of each angler during the summer creel survey at Smoke Lake in 2003. Codes: WALL = walleye; NRPK = northern pike; YLPR = yellow perch; K = kept; R = released. The rating codes anglers provided to describe the quality of the sport fishery ranged from poor (1) to average (5) to excellent (10).

WALL WALL NRPK NRPK YLPR YLPR Question Option Anglers Hours K R K R K R

Commercial baitfish 351 901.25 1 2082 1 208 0 0 Artificial 274 681.75 1 470 5 205 1 0 Leeches 91 257 0 480 1 65 2 0 Angling Dew worms 52 129.25 1 236 1 23 0 0 Method Misc. 51 112 0 194 1 11 0 0 Seined baitfish 14 30.5 0 58 0 4 0 0 Scent baits 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 WALL 758 1944.25 2 3507 8 412 3 0 Species Target NRPK 75 165.5 1 12 1 104 0 0 YLPR 2 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 Average 732 1918.75 2 3250 9 506 3 0 Skill Novice 102 193.5 1 268 0 10 0 0 Pro 1 2.5 0 2 0 0 0 0 16‐64 yrs 624 1665.25 3 2849 7 470 3 0 License < 16 yrs 144 280.75 0 396 2 18 0 0 Category > 64 yrs 64 160.25 0 275 0 28 0 0 Status aboriginal 3 8.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Male 628 1599.75 3 2732 8 443 3 0 Gender Female 207 515 0 788 1 73 0 0 None 488 1103.50 1 1449 7 303 1 0 Depth sounder 332 958.25 1 2008 2 209 2 0 Electronics Depth sounder & GPS 5 26.50 1 1 0 3 0 0 Other 7 20.50 0 55 0 1 0 0 GPS 3 6.00 0 7 0 0 0 0

Appendix 6. Continued

WALL WALL NRPK NRPK YLPR YLPR Question Option Anglers Hours K R K R K R 1 183 393.5 1 88 0 56 0 0 2 82 224 0 86 0 39 0 0 3 77 178.5 0 148 1 49 1 0 4 63 178 0 213 1 117 2 0 Rating of 5 104 250.75 0 359 3 52 0 0 sport fishery 6 72 159.25 0 313 0 48 0 0 7 90 300 1 771 3 93 0 0 8 42 137.5 0 392 0 24 0 0 9 40 72.5 0 353 0 11 0 0 10 82 220.75 1 797 1 27 0 0 Barbless NO 606 1560.25 1 2590 6 354 1 0 YES 229 554.5 2 930 3 162 2 0 Edmonton 199 590.5 1 1102 4 159 2 0 Whitecourt 139 418.3 0 547 1 148 0 0 Fox Creek 116 226 0 446 0 41 0 0 Grande Prairie 99 221.5 1 246 0 24 0 0 Barhead 36 126.5 0 87 2 23 0 0 Drayton Valley 28 59 0 63 0 10 0 0 Edson 28 60 0 118 0 2 0 0 Leduc 24 43.5 0 127 1 4 0 0 Hinton 23 45.5 1 98 0 12 0 0 Sherwood Park 20 51.75 0 168 0 8 0 0 Onoway 13 18 0 112 0 1 0 0 Lethbridge 10 16.5 0 3 0 2 0 0 Ft. Sask. 10 26.5 0 74 0 6 0 0 Blue Ridge 9 22.5 0 67 0 0 1 0 Mayerthorpe 9 30 0 68 0 18 0 0 Slave Lake 8 18.5 0 16 0 4 0 0 Residence Morinville 8 17.5 0 2 0 1 0 0 Spruce Grove 6 13.25 0 53 0 3 0 0

Gibbons 6 12.5 0 8 0 0 0 0 Little Smoky 6 7.5 0 0 0 1 0 0 Stony Plain 5 19 0 33 0 2 0 0 Calgary 4 11 0 1 1 27 0 0 Camrose 4 14 0 13 0 13 0 0 St. Albert 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Grimshaw 4 6.5 0 1 0 0 0 0 Red Deer 3 1.5 0 5 0 0 0 0 Rimbey 2 10 0 2 0 6 0 0 Peace River 2 3.5 0 6 0 1 0 0 Ardrossan 2 5 0 35 0 0 0 0 Whitemouth, MB 2 3 0 12 0 0 0 0 No Jack 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Stetter 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 New West, BC 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 Westlock 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 Fairview 1 2 0 5 0 0 0 0

Appendix 7. Biological data collected from sport angler harvested fish at Smoke Lake in the summer of 2003. Codes: WALL = walleye; NRPK = northern pike; YLPR = yellow perch; LKWH = lake whitefish.

Fork Length Total Length Weight Sample Species Date (mm) Max (mm) (g) Age Sex 1 WALL 24‐May 470 502 ‐‐‐ 11 Female 2 WALL 21‐Jun 403 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 10 Male 3 WALL 22‐Jun 491 520 1200 8 Female 4 WALL 20‐Jul 461 489 950 11 Male 5 NRPK 24‐May 620 654 ‐‐‐ 7 Male 6 NRPK 24‐May 576 610 ‐‐‐ 6 Female 7 NRPK 4‐Jun 749 ‐‐‐ 3000 10 Female 8 NRPK 4‐Jun 620 662 1150 6 Female 9 NRPK 6‐Jun 615 653 1320 8 Male 10 NRPK 8‐Jun 713 744 2000 8 Female 11 NRPK 3‐Jul 632 674 ‐‐‐ 7 Male 12 NRPK 4‐Jul 642 682 1500 8 Female 13 NRPK 16‐Jul 655 688 1756 8 Female 14 NRPK 3‐Aug 628 664 1350 6 ‐‐‐ 15 YLPR 3‐Jul 281 ‐‐‐ 400 6 ‐‐‐ 16 LKWH 6‐Jun 510 579 2500 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐ 17 LKWH 6‐Jun 571 624 2900 ‐‐‐ ‐‐‐

Appendix 8. Dates, species, and fork lengths of fish captured during test angling, Smoke Lake; 2003. Codes: WALL = walleye; NRPK = northern pike.

Date Species Fork Length (mm) 6/22/2003 NRPK 419 6/22/2003 NRPK 495 6/22/2003 NRPK 513 6/22/2003 NRPK 310 6/22/2003 NRPK 456 6/22/2003 NRPK 572 6/22/2003 NRPK 520 6/22/2003 NRPK 457 6/22/2003 NRPK 607 6/22/2003 NRPK 327 6/22/2003 NRPK 442 6/20/2003 NRPK 495 6/21/2003 NRPK 742 6/20/2003 NRPK 439 6/20/2003 NRPK 540 6/22/2003 NRPK 496 6/22/2003 NRPK 513 6/22/2003 NRPK 493 6/22/2003 NRPK 383 6/22/2003 NRPK 478 6/22/2003 NRPK 513 6/22/2003 NRPK 566 7/21/2003 NRPK 441 7/22/2003 NRPK 382 7/22/2003 NRPK 570 7/22/2003 NRPK 411 7/22/2003 NRPK 352 7/22/2003 NRPK 368 7/22/2003 NRPK 294 7/23/2003 NRPK 402 7/23/2003 NRPK 518 7/23/2003 NRPK 375 7/23/2003 NRPK 445 7/23/2003 NRPK 502 7/23/2003 NRPK 500 7/23/2003 NRPK 500 7/23/2003 NRPK 565

Appendix 8. Continued

Date Species Fork Length (mm) 7/23/2003 NRPK 486 7/23/2003 NRPK 354 7/23/2003 NRPK 524 7/23/2003 NRPK 470 7/23/2003 NRPK 421 7/23/2003 NRPK 405 7/23/2003 NRPK 488 7/23/2003 NRPK 512 7/23/2003 NRPK 371 7/23/2003 NRPK 472 7/23/2003 NRPK 250 7/23/2003 NRPK 472 7/23/2003 NRPK 336 7/24/2003 NRPK 483 6/21/2003 WALL 367 6/21/2003 WALL 340 6/21/2003 WALL 370 6/21/2003 WALL 312 6/21/2003 WALL 332 6/21/2003 WALL 403 6/21/2003 WALL 355 6/21/2003 WALL 342 6/21/2003 WALL 359 6/21/2003 WALL 396 6/21/2003 WALL 325 6/21/2003 WALL 310 6/21/2003 WALL 380 6/21/2003 WALL 418 6/21/2003 WALL 353 6/21/2003 WALL 359 6/21/2003 WALL 379 6/21/2003 WALL 365 6/21/2003 WALL 400 6/21/2003 WALL 332 6/21/2003 WALL 385 6/21/2003 WALL 378 6/21/2003 WALL 336 6/21/2003 WALL 269

Appendix 8. Continued

Date Species Fork Length (mm) 6/21/2003 WALL 352 6/21/2003 WALL 419 6/21/2003 WALL 359 6/21/2003 WALL 333 6/21/2003 WALL 297 6/21/2003 WALL 334 6/21/2003 WALL 380 6/21/2003 WALL 369 6/21/2003 WALL 321 6/21/2003 WALL 310 6/21/2003 WALL 315 6/21/2003 WALL 348 6/21/2003 WALL 353 6/21/2003 WALL 371 6/21/2003 WALL 390 6/21/2003 WALL 302 6/22/2003 WALL 403 6/22/2003 WALL 428 6/22/2003 WALL 349 6/22/2003 WALL 338 6/22/2003 WALL 388 6/22/2003 WALL 436 6/22/2003 WALL 420 6/22/2003 WALL 356 6/22/2003 WALL 430 6/22/2003 WALL 389 6/22/2003 WALL 409 6/20/2003 WALL 329 6/20/2003 WALL 320 6/20/2003 WALL 317 6/20/2003 WALL 430 6/20/2003 WALL 397 6/20/2003 WALL 293 6/20/2003 WALL 388 6/20/2003 WALL 378 6/20/2003 WALL 396 6/20/2003 WALL 361 6/20/2003 WALL 390

Appendix 8. Continued

Date Species Fork Length (mm) 6/20/2003 WALL 357 6/20/2003 WALL 376 6/20/2003 WALL 341 6/20/2003 WALL 387 6/20/2003 WALL 391 6/20/2003 WALL 390 6/20/2003 WALL 357 6/20/2003 WALL 433 6/20/2003 WALL 428 6/20/2003 WALL 345 6/20/2003 WALL 319 6/20/2003 WALL 391 6/20/2003 WALL 330 6/20/2003 WALL 350 6/20/2003 WALL 405 6/20/2003 WALL 391 6/20/2003 WALL 405 6/20/2003 WALL 449 6/20/2003 WALL 320 6/20/2003 WALL 337 6/20/2003 WALL 355 6/20/2003 WALL 403 6/20/2003 WALL 350 6/20/2003 WALL 327 6/20/2003 WALL 444 6/20/2003 WALL 381 6/20/2003 WALL 403 6/20/2003 WALL 309 6/20/2003 WALL 409 6/20/2003 WALL 392 6/20/2003 WALL 360 6/21/2003 WALL 322 6/21/2003 WALL 318 6/21/2003 WALL 368 6/21/2003 WALL 352 6/21/2003 WALL 395 6/21/2003 WALL 337 6/21/2003 WALL 411

Appendix 8. Continued

Date Species Fork Length (mm) 6/21/2003 WALL 339 6/21/2003 WALL 426 6/21/2003 WALL 363 6/21/2003 WALL 356 6/21/2003 WALL 412 6/21/2003 WALL 368 6/21/2003 WALL 428 6/21/2003 WALL 316 6/21/2003 WALL 357 6/21/2003 WALL 375 6/21/2003 WALL 321 6/21/2003 WALL 383 6/21/2003 WALL 387 6/21/2003 WALL 360 6/21/2003 WALL 385 6/21/2003 WALL 383 6/21/2003 WALL 364 6/21/2003 WALL 325 6/21/2003 WALL 383 6/21/2003 WALL 340 6/21/2003 WALL 318 6/21/2003 WALL 409 6/21/2003 WALL 400 6/21/2003 WALL 360 6/21/2003 WALL 360 6/21/2003 WALL 356 6/21/2003 WALL 386 6/21/2003 WALL 402 6/21/2003 WALL 395 6/20/2003 WALL 372 6/20/2003 WALL 389 6/20/2003 WALL 447 6/20/2003 WALL 300 6/20/2003 WALL 387 6/20/2003 WALL 388 6/20/2003 WALL 361 6/20/2003 WALL 356 6/20/2003 WALL 342

Appendix 8. Continued

Date Species Fork Length (mm) 6/20/2003 WALL 342 6/20/2003 WALL 393 6/20/2003 WALL 314 6/20/2003 WALL 390 6/20/2003 WALL 306 6/20/2003 WALL 356 6/20/2003 WALL 319 6/20/2003 WALL 370 6/20/2003 WALL 298 6/20/2003 WALL 370 6/20/2003 WALL 433 6/20/2003 WALL 340 6/20/2003 WALL 398 6/20/2003 WALL 301 6/20/2003 WALL 334 6/20/2003 WALL 397 6/20/2003 WALL 396 6/20/2003 WALL 403 6/20/2003 WALL 432 6/20/2003 WALL 308 6/20/2003 WALL 355 6/20/2003 WALL 405 6/20/2003 WALL 450 6/20/2003 WALL 367 6/20/2003 WALL 421 6/20/2003 WALL 390 6/20/2003 WALL 355 6/20/2003 WALL 342 6/20/2003 WALL 381 6/20/2003 WALL 373 6/20/2003 WALL 386 6/20/2003 WALL 312 6/20/2003 WALL 314 6/20/2003 WALL 300 6/20/2003 WALL 325 6/20/2003 WALL 399 6/20/2003 WALL 377 6/20/2003 WALL 396

Appendix 8. Continued

Date Species Fork Length (mm) 6/20/2003 WALL 331 6/20/2003 WALL 410 6/20/2003 WALL 352 6/20/2003 WALL 366 6/20/2003 WALL 344 6/20/2003 WALL 385 6/20/2003 WALL 377 6/20/2003 WALL 362 6/20/2003 WALL 314 6/20/2003 WALL 303 6/20/2003 WALL 315 6/20/2003 WALL 432 6/20/2003 WALL 304 6/20/2003 WALL 371 6/20/2003 WALL 377 6/20/2003 WALL 435 6/20/2003 WALL 372 6/20/2003 WALL 392 6/20/2003 WALL 363 6/20/2003 WALL 363 6/20/2003 WALL 338 6/20/2003 WALL 354 6/20/2003 WALL 402 6/20/2003 WALL 420 6/20/2003 WALL 391 6/20/2003 WALL 315 6/20/2003 WALL 392 6/20/2003 WALL 353 6/21/2003 WALL 411 6/21/2003 WALL 326 6/21/2003 WALL 361 6/21/2003 WALL 363 6/21/2003 WALL 395 6/21/2003 WALL 386 6/21/2003 WALL 345 6/21/2003 WALL 336 6/21/2003 WALL 385 6/21/2003 WALL 375

Appendix 8. Continued

Date Species Fork Length (mm) 6/21/2003 WALL 361 6/21/2003 WALL 424 6/21/2003 WALL 317 6/21/2003 WALL 404 6/21/2003 WALL 337 6/22/2003 WALL 435 6/22/2003 WALL 376 6/22/2003 WALL 390 6/22/2003 WALL 374 6/22/2003 WALL 380 6/22/2003 WALL 379 6/22/2003 WALL 401 6/22/2003 WALL 431 6/22/2003 WALL 373 6/22/2003 WALL 431 6/22/2003 WALL 324 6/22/2003 WALL 375 6/22/2003 WALL 405 6/22/2003 WALL 340 6/22/2003 WALL 389 6/22/2003 WALL 330 6/22/2003 WALL 439 6/22/2003 WALL 449 6/22/2003 WALL 372 6/22/2003 WALL 424 6/22/2003 WALL 362 6/22/2003 WALL 358 6/22/2003 WALL 331 6/22/2003 WALL 361 6/22/2003 WALL 374 6/22/2003 WALL 375 6/21/2003 WALL 362 6/21/2003 WALL 331 6/21/2003 WALL 360 6/21/2003 WALL 356 6/21/2003 WALL 379 6/21/2003 WALL 355 6/21/2003 WALL 413

Appendix 8. Continued

Date Species Fork Length (mm) 6/21/2003 WALL 361 6/21/2003 WALL 299 6/21/2003 WALL 397 6/21/2003 WALL 343 6/21/2003 WALL 382 6/21/2003 WALL 400 6/21/2003 WALL 379 6/21/2003 WALL 376 6/21/2003 WALL 362 7/21/2003 WALL 345 7/21/2003 WALL 311 7/21/2003 WALL 372 7/21/2003 WALL 335 7/21/2003 WALL 446 7/22/2003 WALL 339 7/22/2003 WALL 315 7/22/2003 WALL 316 7/22/2003 WALL 416 7/22/2003 WALL 382 7/22/2003 WALL 304 7/22/2003 WALL 300 7/22/2003 WALL 414 7/22/2003 WALL 362 7/22/2003 WALL 323 7/23/2003 WALL 483 7/23/2003 WALL 338 7/23/2003 WALL 327 7/23/2003 WALL 345 7/23/2003 WALL 475 7/23/2003 WALL 408 7/23/2003 WALL 411 7/23/2003 WALL 343 7/23/2003 WALL 398 7/23/2003 WALL 338 7/23/2003 WALL 320 7/23/2003 WALL 328 7/23/2003 WALL 333 7/23/2003 WALL 363

Appendix 8. Continued

Date Species Fork Length (mm) 7/23/2003 WALL 321 7/23/2003 WALL 337 7/23/2003 WALL 337 7/23/2003 WALL 322 7/23/2003 WALL 384 7/23/2003 WALL 358 7/23/2003 WALL 401 7/23/2003 WALL 399 7/23/2003 WALL 311 7/23/2003 WALL 415 7/23/2003 WALL 396 7/23/2003 WALL 386 7/23/2003 WALL 396 7/23/2003 WALL 378 7/23/2003 WALL 426 7/23/2003 WALL 398 7/23/2003 WALL 381 7/23/2003 WALL 403 7/23/2003 WALL 379 7/23/2003 WALL 335 7/23/2003 WALL 360 7/23/2003 WALL 291 7/23/2003 WALL 291 7/23/2003 WALL 321 7/23/2003 WALL 456 7/23/2003 WALL 368 7/23/2003 WALL 433 7/23/2003 WALL 414 7/23/2003 WALL 398 7/23/2003 WALL 326 7/23/2003 WALL 280 7/24/2003 WALL 323

Appendix 9. Fall Walleye Index Netting data collected from Smoke Lake in 2003. Species codes are: walleye = WALL; northern pike = NRPK; yellow perch = YLPR; lake whitefish = LKWH; cisco = CISC. Sex codes follow Alberta Fish and Wildlife standard protocols: 1 = immature female, 2 = maturing female, 3 = mature female, 4 = ripe female, 5 = spent female, 6 = immature male, 7 = maturing male, 8 = mature male, 9 = ripe male, and 10 = spent male.

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 1 16‐Sep‐03 YLPR 17 111 119 2 16‐Sep‐03 YLPR 14 102 106 3 16‐Sep‐03 YLPR 9 92 99 4 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 12 109 117 IMM 5 16‐Sep‐03 LNSC 16 112 120 6 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 20 NM 7 16‐Sep‐03 YLPR 34 140 149 8 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 59 186 200 IMM 1 9 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 157 223 252 10 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 171 227 257 11 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 177 226 257 12 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 153 225 253 13 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 450 349 374 6 5 14 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 929 437 466 3 7 15 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 673 392 420 1 5 16 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 427 339 362 6 5 17 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 936 432 465 3 7 18 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 670 397 425 8 5 19 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 710 398 428 8 5 20 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 580 367 396 8 4 21 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 660 392 421 8 5 22 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 430 340 363 1 5 23 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 710 393 422 8 7

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 24 16‐Sep‐03 NRPK 550 425 451 2 25 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 63 213 242 26 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 131 216 242 27 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 166 228 260 28 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 156 221 253 29 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 780 413 443 3 8 30 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 540 353 380 8 7 31 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 540 365 391 1 5 32 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 690 395 419 3 6 33 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 830 414 455 8 6 34 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 1010 477 492 3 9 35 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 600 381 410 8 6 36 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 880 419 452 3 6 37 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 740 408 435 3 8 38 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 490 363 388 1 4 39 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 830 413 444 8 6 40 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 730 395 428 3 6 41 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 500 350 377 8 4 42 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 670 390 419 8 5 43 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 470 328 370 44 16‐Sep‐03 NRPK 4170 853 904 3 45 16‐Sep‐03 NRPK 1350 622 659 1 46 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 1020 443 474 3 7 47 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 1040 453 481 8 8 48 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 1020 441 469 3 9 49 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 970 437 465 8 10 50 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 810 405 432 8 9 51 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 1570 455 513

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 52 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2430 521 476 53 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 780 404 433 8 54 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3070 548 607 55 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2410 523 580 56 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2660 513 576 57 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2740 517 580 58 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2100 555 609 59 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 1720 453 510 60 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2360 540 597 61 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3050 577 637 62 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2350 490 547 63 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3100 564 633 64 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3080 555 621 65 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2570 558 622 66 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2440 526 590 68 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 610 377 404 1 5 69 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 650 385 414 8 5 70 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 470 352 381 8 5 71 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 530 365 390 1 5 72 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 560 375 400 1 5 73 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 490 355 379 6 5 74 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 470 347 373 8 5 75 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 730 408 438 8 8 76 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 160 247 265 IMM 2 77 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 160 230 261 78 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 660 388 416 8 9 79 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 850 423 453 8 9 80 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 670 382 408 8 8

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 81 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 690 377 405 3 7 82 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 790 412 445 3 7 83 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 520 355 380 8 5 84 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 780 412 439 8 8 85 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 760 413 442 3 8 86 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 680 387 415 8 5 87 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 610 392 421 1 5 88 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 440 338 365 6 5 89 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 470 353 378 1 5 90 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 530 362 386 8 5 91 16‐Sep‐03 NRPK 860 495 632 92 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 740 398 428 3 10 93 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 620 374 395 8 9 94 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 750 397 425 3 7 95 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 710 388 417 8 7 96 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 520 362 389 8 5 97 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 530 363 387 1 5 98 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 650 390 417 8 5 99 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 680 387 415 1 5 100 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 650 380 410 1 5 101 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 550 357 382 1 5 102 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 420 331 357 6 5 103 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 440 341 365 1 5 104 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 490 347 373 8 5 105 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 500 355 382 8 5 106 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 520 349 373 8 5 107 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 450 343 376 8 5 108 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 890 427 457 3 9

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 109 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 880 404 431 3 ‐‐ 110 16‐Sep‐03 WALL 920 422 456 8 7 111 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3060 550 611 112 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2190 508 584 113 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2730 530 588 114 16‐Sep‐03 WHSC 2050 515 549 115 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2060 468 523 116 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2820 543 604 117 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 1800 451 500 118 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3090 545 596 119 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2790 530 595 120 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3220 560 623 121 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2580 515 567 122 16‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2500 528 591 123 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 960 439 472 3 7 124 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 650 393 415 3 5 125 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 11 97 106 126 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 17 NM 123 127 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 15 107 112 128 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 9 98 103 129 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 920 435 468 8 10 130 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 790 415 444 3 9 131 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 520 352 379 8 5 132 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 480 350 373 1 5 133 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 140 243 260 IMM 2 134 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 70 190 204 IMM 1 135 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 70 186 200 IMM 1 136 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 60 183 195 IMM 1

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 137 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 60 187 202 IMM 1 138 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 50 172 185 IMM 1 139 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 50 177 187 IMM 140 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 610 346 392 141 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 43 150 159 142 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 850 422 455 3 9 143 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 600 364 390 8 6 144 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 590 372 398 8 5 145 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 500 342 368 8 5 146 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 460 340 368 8 5 147 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 460 338 365 1 5 148 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 530 362 387 8 5 149 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 390 328 355 8 5 150 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 540 359 385 8 5 151 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 570 372 402 3 8 152 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 130 235 253 IMM 2 153 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 180 250 269 IMM 2 154 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 180 257 277 IMM 2 155 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 200 239 270 156 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 200 248 280 157 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 150 225 252 158 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 180 237 267 159 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 140 225 253 160 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 590 370 397 8 5 161 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 830 410 436 8 8 162 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 620 374 401 8 5 163 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 880 431 462 3 9 164 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 810 425 457 8 9

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 165 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 610 382 410 1 5 166 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 550 363 389 8 5 167 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 820 425 451 8 7 168 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 590 372 402 1 5 169 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 390 329 355 1 5 170 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 590 371 397 1 5 171 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 390 323 349 1 5 172 17‐Sep‐03 NRPK 1130 533 569 3 173 17‐Sep‐03 NRPK 870 517 550 3 174 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 620 344 385 180 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 180 229 260 181 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 140 220 247 182 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 120 215 244 183 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2630 505 566 184 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 580 347 392 185 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 530 328 371 186 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 400 308 349 187 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 660 384 421 8 6 188 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 750 415 444 8 6 189 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 570 375 390 8 5 190 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 860 431 460 3 6 191 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 730 407 433 3 5 192 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 780 410 441 3 7 193 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 602 380 403 8 5 194 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 440 322 358 8 5 195 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 590 376 400 8 6 196 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 580 364 391 8 5 197 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 510 340 367 8 4

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 198 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 590 393 420 1 5 199 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 390 325 350 6 5 200 17‐Sep‐03 NRPK 1080 NM 565 3 201 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 330 272 284 202 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 410 294 306 203 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 500 335 374 204 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 460 322 364 205 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 820 405 435 8 8 206 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 380 320 346 8 4 207 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 580 363 393 1 5 208 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2560 505 573 209 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 1830 460 514 210 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 1620 465 519 211 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 640 345 389 212 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 670 347 392 213 17‐Sep‐03 NRPK 1620 610 649 3 215 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2220 503 560 216 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2690 520 583 217 17‐Sep‐03 NRPK 3160 758 802 3 218 17‐Sep‐03 NRPK 4310 814 851 3 219 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2580 535 597 220 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2730 547 617 221 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 19 NM 117 222 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 11 97 104 223 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 12 105 111 224 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 12 107 115 IMM 225 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 730 405 435 8 8 226 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 39 142 151

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 227 17‐Sep‐03 WHSC 49 164 175 228 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 520 357 387 8 5 229 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 540 358 384 8 5 230 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 660 377 406 8 8 231 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 460 345 368 8 4 232 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 460 351 375 1 5 233 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 710 402 427 8 7 234 17‐Sep‐03 YLPR 150 210 220 8 235 17‐Sep‐03 NRPK 230 316 340 1 236 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 820 412 440 8 8 237 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 600 372 399 8 8 238 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 800 407 457 3 8 239 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 780 406 435 8 8 240 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 520 365 391 8 5 241 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 530 360 388 8 5 242 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 420 335 359 8 5 243 17‐Sep‐03 NRPK 880 500 532 3 244 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 600 375 402 8 6 245 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 1010 440 470 8 7 246 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 400 396 425 8 8 247 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 710 395 426 8 6 248 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 720 400 425 8 8 249 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 530 352 380 8 6 250 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 1020 445 479 3 8 251 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 720 390 416 3 5 252 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 730 400 432 8 9 253 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 460 344 369 1 5 254 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 530 356 383 8 6

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 255 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 450 337 362 8 5 256 17‐Sep‐03 NRPK 1500 607 645 3 257 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 580 342 382 258 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 560 336 375 259 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 990 437 470 3 9 260 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 890 424 451 3 8 261 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 660 392 421 8 8 262 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 730 380 410 8 8 263 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 930 438 470 3 8 264 17‐Sep‐03 WALL 1100 459 490 3 7 265 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2420 515 578 266 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2670 555 615 267 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2800 540 602 268 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 600 337 377 269 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2370 530 591 270 17‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2670 562 609 271 18‐Sep‐03 YLPR 10 102 108 NM 272 18‐Sep‐03 YLPR 10 111 117 NM 273 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 10 96 107 NM 274 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 60 185 197 IMM 275 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 900 430 455 3 276 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 530 362 386 8 277 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 820 407 440 8 277a 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 570 368 393 8 278 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 870 421 452 3 279 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 560 370 395 8 280 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 780 418 445 3 281 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 720 388 413 8 9

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 282 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 480 351 376 1 283 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 940 433 465 3 8 284 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 730 400 430 8 9 285 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 540 370 399 1 5 286 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 570 385 410 3 5 287 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 470 354 381 8 5 288 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 460 357 380 8 5 289 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 680 384 415 8 7 290 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 980 460 488 3 9 291 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 590 380 410 8 5 292 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 550 368 395 8 293 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 660 399 422 3 8 294 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 570 372 398 1 295 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 510 350 376 8 5 296 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 800 426 454 3 7 297 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 590 385 408 1 5 298 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 560 370 395 8 8 299 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 720 401 434 3 7 300 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 520 355 385 8 5 301 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 440 350 375 1 5 302 18‐Sep‐03 NRPK 1040 533 571 3 303 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 720 400 431 3 7 304 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 830 406 430 3 8 305 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 740 397 416 8 10 306 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 700 375 405 8 307 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 800 403 431 3 308 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 710 407 435 3 309 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 870 426 455 3 6

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 310 18‐Sep‐03 YLPR 10 97 103 311 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 510 323 361 312 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 520 335 372 313 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 960 403 443 314 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 500 323 365 315 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 890 385 445 316 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 190 222 250 317 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 200 234 264 318 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 140 220 250 319 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 190 236 264 320 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 190 241 272 321 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 170 231 254 322 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 160 220 250 323 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 160 228 258 324 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 150 212 240 325 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 130 213 240 326 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 180 234 266 327 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 160 230 257 328 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 270 297 320 1 5 329 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 620 372 400 8 5 330 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 700 393 422 8 9 331 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 570 372 400 1 5 332 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 540 365 390 8 5 333 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 330 310 333 8 5 334 18‐Sep‐03 YLPR 250 248 261 3 335 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 480 322 358 336 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 400 302 340 337 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 160 227 255

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 338 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 370 303 341 339 18‐Sep‐03 NRPK 1070 548 587 3 340 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 670 385 415 8 8 341 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 620 383 413 8 8 342 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 850 420 448 3 9 343 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 490 357 382 1 343a 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 850 415 447 8 8 344 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 480 357 383 8 5 345 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 550 365 393 1 5 346 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 580 363 390 8 347 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 410 324 364 348 18‐Sep‐03 WHSC 1670 458 485 349 18‐Sep‐03 WHSC 2130 522 553 350 18‐Sep‐03 WHSC 1590 484 517 351 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 590 373 400 8 6 352 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2290 507 566 358 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2020 496 550 359 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3250 582 646 360 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 1940 496 562 361 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2840 540 601 362 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2430 498 565 363 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3130 567 633 364 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2950 541 601 365 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2650 521 578 366 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3180 575 635 367 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2220 550 564 368 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 50 175 188 IMM 1 369 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 10 103 111 IMM

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 370 18‐Sep‐03 YLPR 10 100 106 371 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 800 430 460 3 8 372 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 680 381 410 8 8 373 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 570 372 403 8 8 374 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 170 253 270 IMM 2 375 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 170 226 255 376 18‐Sep‐03 YLPR 30 143 154 377 18‐Sep‐03 YLPR 50 150 159 378 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 770 404 435 8 7 379 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 670 385 415 8 7 380 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 720 398 430 8 8 381 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 750 407 440 3 7 382 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 560 367 395 8 5 383 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 360 315 338 1 5 384 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 460 343 367 8 5 385 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 550 357 383 8 5 386 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 460 340 365 8 5 387 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 150 247 265 IMM 2 388 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 150 225 255 389 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH NM NM NM 390 18‐Sep‐03 NRPK 450 392 418 8 391 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 840 414 444 3 8 392 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 960 444 476 3 8 393 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 780 395 425 3 9 394 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 560 367 396 8 6 395 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 790 417 448 1 7 396 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 850 427 457 8 8 397 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 790 393 422 8 8

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 398 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 740 397 427 3 8 399 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 620 368 398 8 5 400 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 700 388 418 8 8 401 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 630 373 402 8 7 402 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 820 424 455 3 7 403 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 1070 456 483 8 9 404 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 580 367 396 1 5 405 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 570 380 403 1 5 406 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 900 435 462 3 8 407 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 470 347 374 8 5 408 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 390 320 346 8 5 409 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 150 220 249 410 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 190 238 268 411 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 120 215 243 412 18‐Sep‐03 NRPK 790 480 510 8 413 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 560 364 396 1 6 414 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 790 410 440 3 8 415 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 400 331 356 8 5 416 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 560 365 392 8 5 417 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 540 365 395 8 7 418 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 580 367 406 8 8 419 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 490 359 386 8 6 420 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 1080 442 477 3 8 421 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 670 396 424 8 8 422 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 960 433 463 3 8 423 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 650 387 413 8 8 424 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 580 375 401 1 5 425 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 530 359 385 1 6

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 426 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 890 420 451 3 8 427 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 870 435 465 3 8 428 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 670 393 418 1 5 429 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 590 328 373 430 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 510 325 362 431 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 640 345 386 432 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 150 227 257 433 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 640 385 413 8 7 434 18‐Sep‐03 NRPK 4250 843 887 3 435 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 870 420 450 3 8 436 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 1160 465 496 8 11 437 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 1100 445 475 8 11 438 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 880 431 464 3 10 439 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 840 423 455 3 8 440 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 990 439 468 8 9 441 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 570 372 400 8 5 442 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2860 545 604 443 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2430 508 570 444 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 1690 470 526 445 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 470 328 366 446 18‐Sep‐03 NRPK 1520 610 646 3 447 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2620 530 589 448 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2800 537 597 449 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3380 553 614 450 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 1630 463 509 451 18‐Sep‐03 WALL 610 395 424 3 452 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3190 550 617 453 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3160 585 656

Appendix 9. Continued

Weight Fork Length Total Length Age Sample Date Species (g) (mm) (mm) Sex (y) 454 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 3190 533 590 455 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2750 538 598 456 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 1590 460 518 457 18‐Sep‐03 LKWH 2060 513 573

CCONSERVATIONONSERVATION RREPORTEPORT SSERIESERIES The Alberta Conservation Association acknowledges the following partner for their generous support of this project