Alberta Conservation Association

COMPENSATION PLAN FOR THE TERASEN PIPELINES (TRANS MOUNTAIN) INC. TMX – Anchor Loop Project

Submitted to: TERA Environmental Consultants Calgary, AB & Westland Resource Group Inc. Victoria, BC

for: Terasen Pipelines (Trans Mountain) Inc. Calgary, AB

Submitted by:

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd. Calgary, AB

Revision I

June 2006 File: AAR05-19

COMPENSATION PLAN FOR THE TERASEN PIPELINES (TRANS MOUNTAIN) INC. Revision I TMX – Anchor Loop Project

Submitted to:

TERA Environmental Consultants Calgary, Alberta & Westland Resource Group Inc. Victoria, British Columbia

for: Terasen Pipelines (Trans Mountain) Inc. Calgary, Alberta

Submitted by:

C.H. Bonnington and T.D. Boag

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd. Calgary, Alberta

Revision I June 2006 File: AAR05-19

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 Fish and Fish Habitat Sensitivity Rating...... 3 Derivation of Pipeline Crossing Method Proposed...... 6 Recommendations for Monitoring ...... 7 Derivation of Vehicle Crossing Method Proposed...... 7 Fish and Fish Habitat Risk Rating...... 8 1.2 Summary of Findings...... 8 1.3 Regulatory Overview ...... 9 Definition of HADD ...... 9 Definition of Compensation ...... 9 The Fisheries Act and Determination of HADD...... 9 Determination of the Required Compensation...... 9 2.0 APPROACH...... 12 2.1 Rationale for Identifying HADD Candidate Sites...... 12 2.2 Quantification of HADD ...... 12 2.3 Site-Specific Compensation ...... 14 3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT-SPECIFIC COMPENSATION ...... 17 3.1 Restoration ...... 17 3.2 Jasper National Park, Alberta...... 17 Restoring Connectivity for Mountain Whitefish Rearing Habitat ...... 18 Restoring Connectivity for Bull Trout Habitat ...... 18 Bull Trout & Athabasca Rainbow Trout Habitat Expansion via Brook Trout Extirpation – Pilot Project ...... 18 Habitat Availability Versus Use ...... 19 3.3 Mount Robson Provincial Park, British Columbia...... 19 Yellowhead Creek: Enhancing Rainbow Trout Habitat ...... 20 Yellowhead Lake: Connectivity of Aquatic Habitat...... 20 Restoration of Bull Trout Habitat in Tributary to the Upper Fraser River ...... 20 3.4 Follow-up and Audit of Compensation Measures ...... 21 4.0 REFERENCES ...... 22 4.1 Personal Communication ...... 22 4.2 Literature Cited ...... 22

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Updated TMX – Anchor Loop Waterbody Crossing Summary ...... 24

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Regional Location of the TMX – Anchor Loop Project ...... 2 Figure 2 QAES Assessment and Classification of Fish Bearing and Non-Fish-Bearing Waterbodies ...... 4 Figure 3 Deriving Fish and Fish Habitat Sensitivity Rating ...... 5 Figure 4 A Decision Framework for The Determination and Authorization of HADD of Fish Habitat (DFO 1998b) ...... 11

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

LIST OF TABLES 1 TABLE 1 DFO’S HIERARCHY OF COMPENSATION OPTIONS ...... 10 TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF FISH-BEARING OR POTENTIAL FISH-BEARING CROSSINGS ...... 13 TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF HADD ANTICIPATED AT SELECTED WATERCOURSES BY THE PROJECT...... 15 TABLE 4 PROJECT-SPECIFIC COMPENSATION OFF RIGHT-OF-WAY ...... 17

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The TMX – Anchor Loop Project (the “Project”) proposes to loop a portion of its existing National Energy Board (“NEB”) regulated oil pipeline system (the “Trans Mountain pipeline” or “Trans Mountain”) to increase the capacity of the Trans Mountain pipeline to meet growing shipper demand. The Project involves the construction of 7 km of 762 mm (30 inch) outside diameter (OD) pipe from west of Hinton, Alberta (KP 310.1) to Hinton Pump Station (KP 317.0) and 151 km of 914 mm (36 inch) OD pipe from Hinton Pump Station to a location near Rearguard, British Columbia (BC) (KP 468.0) (Figure 1). The Project will traverse federal, provincial and private lands, including Jasper National Park (JNP) in Alberta and Mount Robson Provincial Park (MRPP) in BC. Construction of the Project is scheduled to commence in mid-2007 and extend until the third quarter of 2008.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd. (AAR), in association with TERA Environmental Consultants and Westland Resource Group Inc. (TERA/Westland), was retained by Terasen Pipelines (Trans Mountain) Inc. (Terasen Pipelines) to prepare a compensation plan to address temporary habitat loss for fishes in watercourses to be crossed by the Project. This report outlines the rationale that has been followed in determining the likelihood and extent of the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) of fish habitat and the compensation proposed for site-specific watercourse crossings along the Proposed Route. Options for project-specific compensation are also identified.

1.1 Background

This report is supported by the fish and fish habitat technical report prepared by AAR (2005a) as well as the fish-bearing atlas, non-fish-bearing reports, and TMX-Anchor Loop Project Waterbody Crossing table (see Appendix A) submitted to the NEB and other responsible authorities in February 2006. Additional information pertaining to the environmental protection and restoration of waterbodies along the Proposed Route is provided in the Environmental Assessment (TERA/Westland 2005a) and Volume II: Environmental Protection and Restoration Plans (TERA/Westland 2005b) filed with the NEB and should be reviewed concurrently with this report.

This section provides a brief overview of the waterbodies assessed along the Proposed Route and derivation of fish and fish habitat sensitivity and crossing risk as it relates to HADD.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

Figure 1 Regional Location of the TMX – Anchor Loop Project

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

The fish-bearing status of each watercourse was assigned based on existing inventory information or fish presence-absence sampling carried out over one or two seasons (Figure 2).

In order to classify a waterbody as “non-fish-bearing” in BC, it is necessary to visit and sample that waterbody in two different seasons. Typically this designation can be applied to the whole system since the lowermost section of the watercourse was sampled.

Although a requirement only in BC, many JNP sites were also visited a second time in spring 2005. These sites were: those where no fish were sampled or observed in fall 2004, but were considered to have the potential to support fishes; those where only a single species was captured or observed in fall 2004 but with habitat potential for spring spawners; and those that had a confluence with a larger system and, therefore, the potential to be used as a staging area.

All crossings investigated, with the exception of those with no visible channel (NVC) were given a Sensitivity Rating. Ratings were given as either Low, Low-Moderate, Moderate, Moderate- High, or High. The Sensitivity Rating uses an average for fish habitat rated for spring and fall spawning, rearing, wintering and migration.

Fish and Fish Habitat Sensitivity Rating

Determining the Sensitivity Rating followed a process that combined:

• TMX Classification derived from channel width and fish presence or absence (AAR 2005a);

• riverine habitat potential to support fishes at the time of sampling; and

• potential for that habitat to support fishes at other times (e.g., winter low-flow).

A Sensitivity Rating was then assigned based on an extrapolation of habitat potential and conditions that might exist at the time of construction (Figure 3). Non-fish-bearing streams were generally rated as Low, unless fish habitat within the zone-of-influence was deemed to have some potential.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

Classification of Fish Habitat

Low, Medium, High None

Is the water body Determine presence seasonal or intermittent? of fish using: Electrofishing, Minnow traps, and Yes No Observation

Fishes captured No Fish, or single spp. or observed (single spawning season) captured or observed

Carry out second season of sampling (alternative spawning season)

Fish captured or observed No Fish captured in either or both seasons or observed

Fish-Bearing Non-Fish-Bearing

Figure 2 QAES Assessment and Classification of Fish-Bearing and Non- Fish-Bearing Waterbodies

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

TMX Classification Habitat Potential Sensitivity Rating

After assessing the habitat High 1 potential… 2 High 3 Given the quality of the 4 habitat at the time of High-Moderate 5 High-Moderate sampling, extrapolate this to 6 what might exist at the time of 7 construction. 8 Moderate 10 e.g., water depth at time of Moderate 8 (NCD) construction? Moderate-Low If high habitat potential in Moderate-Low spring, but no water in winter Low or frozen to bottom, then Sensitivity Rating for winter construction is lowered.

…assign Sensitivity Rating Low based on extrapolation.

9 (NVC) NA

Figure 3 Deriving Fish and Fish Habitat Sensitivity Rating

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

Instream work windows were proposed for all crossings based on the following:

a) The species sampled at each crossing.

b) The specific life-history stage(s) of each species (i.e., young-of-the-year, juveniles, adults, spawning adults) known to occur at each crossing.

c) The habitat available and its suitability for spawning, rearing, over-wintering, and migration.

Proposed work windows are intended to protect each ‘critical life-history stage’ (spawning adults, incubating eggs, newly emerged fry) of each species. These windows represent the period when construction activities should occur to avoid or minimize adverse effects on fish and their habitat. Generalized instream work windows have been identified by provincial agencies for both Alberta (Alberta Environment (AENV 2001a, b) and BC based on average life history attributes recorded for species over much or all of their range. Specific instream work windows have also been proposed for operations and maintenance activities along the existing Trans Mountain pipeline route. These designated work windows were refined for the TMX – Anchor Loop Project by defining species-specific least risk periods based on sampling results and the actual life-history of populations in headwater, montane systems in the upper Athabasca River and Fraser River watersheds (see Appendix A).

Where multiple species occur within a waterbody, all instream work windows were overlapped and the period with no sensitive life history stages was defined as the combined work window.

Non-fish-bearing waterbodies were generally allocated an “open” instream work window, unless the sensitivity of the waterbody was rated as High, or where there was a potential to affect fish or their habitat immediately downstream.

Derivation of Pipeline Crossing Method Proposed Recommended pipeline crossing methods that protect fish and their habitat were proposed for each crossing following the stepwise questions below:

Fish-Bearing Waterbody 1. Do any of the proposed crossings affect any “critical habitat” (habitat that if removed/altered, would impact 80% or more of a waterbody’s population)? a. If “yes”, then the crossing method proposed defaulted to “trenchless” b. If “no”, then “isolation” was considered.

2. Can the waterbody be isolated without affecting fish or their activities (e.g., reproduction or migration) adversely? a. If “yes”, then “isolation” was the pipeline crossing method proposed. b. If “no”, then can the fish or fish habitat issue be resolved with a specific timing window? i. If “yes”, then “isolation” was considered during a specific timing window.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

ii. If “no”, and the presence of fish or fish assemblages was during a non- critical life-history stage, then “isolation with fish salvage” was proposed, or iii. If “no”, and the presence of fish or fish assemblages was during a critical life-history stage, then “trenchless” was the preferred pipeline crossing method.

Non-Fish-Bearing Waterbody 3. Is the waterbody dry or intermittent? a. If “yes”, then during the times that the crossing is dry or frozen to bottom, an “open cut” method was proposed. b. If “no” (i.e., flow is perennial), then “isolation” was the proposed pipeline crossing method.

4. Was the crossing classified as having NVC? If so, then “open cut” was the default crossing method proposed.

5. Was the crossing classified as a Non-Classified Drainage (NCD)? If so, then… a. During periods when it was dry or frozen to bottom, “open cut” was the pipeline crossing method proposed. b. At all other times, “isolation” was proposed.

Recommendations for Monitoring Monitoring was recommended for each crossing where fish were sampled and at several non- fish-bearing crossings where the risk to fish-bearing habitat immediately downstream was considered to be High. These non-fish-bearing crossings were generally characterized by steep gradient with adjacent fish-bearing habitat within the zone-of-influence.

Derivation of Vehicle Crossing Method Proposed Vehicle crossing methods proposed for each crossing were derived after considering: • the morphology of the waterbody at the crossing (width, depth and bank shape);

• the suitability and practical application of available crossing methods;

• the sensitivity of the fish and fish habitat being crossed; and

• the timing window proposed for the works (summer or winter).

Recommendations by the Oil and Gas Commission (OGC) for stream crossings in northeast BC (OGC 2004) and measures for temporary winter crossings provided by the former BC Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection (MWLAP) (2004) were considered when deriving the vehicle crossing method proposed. Crossing methods are based on the notation established in Alberta under the Code for Practice for Watercourse Crossings (AENV 2001b), namely:

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

Type 1 Single span bridge Type 2 Multi span bridge Type 3 Ramp and culvert, or ramp and open bottom structure, where specified Type 4 Ford Type 5 Log or snow fills (includes temporary crossings such as ice bridges)

Fish and Fish Habitat Risk Rating The overall risk to fish and their habitat was rated for fish-bearing streams utilizing the Sensitivity Rating in conjunction with the pipeline and vehicle crossing method proposed, and the specific timing window proposed for the works.

Timing Fish Sensitivity + & = Risk Crossing Methods Proposed

The derived risk rating takes into account the reduced risk to fish and their habitat by carrying out works using non-intrusive vehicle crossing methods and during periods when direct or indirect effect pathways to fish and their habitat are avoided or minimized. For example, a stream with a High Sensitivity Rating (based on species present or habitat available) is proposed to be crossed by a single span bridge and the pipeline installed using an isolation technique within the proposed instream work window under low flow conditions. The resulting risk to fish and their habitat is rated as Moderate because the magnitude and duration of sediment input are minimized, but not avoided.

1.2 Summary of Findings Following two years of fish population and riverine habitat inventories along the Proposed Route, a total of 220 potential waterbody crossings were investigated. 119 of these were classified as NVCs with no defined bed or banks. These do not represent fish habitat and are therefore not considered waterbodies or rated for fish sensitivity. A total of 101 watercourse crossings have been assessed. Of this total, 34 are classified as fish-bearing and having a Moderate-High sensitivity and 17 are considered likely to result in HADD during construction. Initially, 7 of the 34 crossings were considered for trenchless crossing methods however, further geotechnical investigations completed during the spring of 2006 indicated the Snaring River and its side channel, Miette River (KL 383), Miette River (KL 396) and the Fraser River cannot be drilled. The Moose River crossing is the only crossing where further geotechnical evaluation is planned in July 2006. A slip bore is proposed for unnamed creek 354.1. Given the difficult geotechnical

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

conditions in the project area for a Horizontal Directional Drill (HDD), the contingency crossing method for the Moose River was considered and included in the compensation plan.

An updated list of watercourse crossings is provided in Appendix A. This table was also issued as part of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO's) Information Request #1. A detailed summary of all fish-bearing watercourses can be found in the fish-bearing atlas for the Proposed Route (AAR 2005b).

1.3 Regulatory Overview

Definition of HADD Although the Fisheries Act (Government of Canada, 1985) refers to HADD, it does not provide a definition. The DFO defines HADD as: any change in fish habitat that reduces its capacity to support one or more life processes (DFO 1998a).

Definition of Compensation Compensation is defined in the DFO Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat (1986) as:

The replacement of natural habitat, increase in the productivity of existing habitat, or maintenance of fish production by artificial means in circumstances dictated by social and economic conditions, where mitigation techniques and other measures are not adequate to maintain habitats for Canada's fisheries resources.

The Fisheries Act and Determination of HADD Section 35 (1) of the Fisheries Act (Government of Canada, 1985) states that… “No person shall carry on any work or undertaking that results in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat.” While Section 35 of the Fisheries Act addresses strictly HADD to fish habitat, the “No Net Loss” guiding principle in its Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat is enforced to ensure the productive capacity of fish habitat is maintained post-construction (DFO 1998b).

It is important to recognize that only DFO can determine whether the Fisheries Act has been, or could be, contravened. The decision framework followed by DFO in their determination of HADD is presented in Figure 4. Part of this approval process requires that any HADD of fish habitat be mitigated through enhancement or improvement of that already existing, to satisfy the “No Net Loss” guiding principle (DFO 1998b). If violation is likely, the proponent must obtain ministerial approval to proceed with the works and remain in compliance with the Act.

Determination of the Required Compensation

The purpose of compensation is to ensure that no net loss of fish habitat productive capacity occurs following construction of works instream. A hierarchy of options is followed by DFO to determine the quantity of compensation that may be required (Table 1). Given the uncertainty surrounding the net productive capacity gained through the implementation of compensation

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

measures, DFO usually aims for a compensation ratio exceeding 1:1. For compensation options adopted by DFO, option 1 is preferred to options 2, 3 and 4 (Table 1).

Table 1

DFO’s Hierarchy of Compensation Options1 Option 1 Create or increase the productive capacity of like-for-like habitat in the same ecological unit.

Option 2 Create or increase the productive capacity of unlike habitat in the same ecological unit.

Option 3 Create or increase the productive capacity of habitat in a different ecological unit.

As a last resort, use artificial production techniques to maintain a stock of fish, deferred Option 4 compensation or restoration of chemically contaminated sites.

1Adapted from DFO (2006)

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

Figure 4 A decision framework for the determination and authorization of HADD of fish habitat (DFO 1998b)

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

2.0 APPROACH

2.1 Rationale for Identifying HADD Candidate Sites The fish habitat within each watercourse was rated for the various critical life-history stages of fishes (spawning, rearing, wintering and migration). By assessing the species present against the habitat available, the likelihood of a species being present at certain life-history stages can be made. This in turn allows the development of instream work windows.

A Sensitivity Rating was then assigned based on an extrapolation of habitat potential and conditions that might exist at the time of construction. Non-fish-bearing watercourses were generally rated as Low, unless habitat present within the zone-of-influence was rated higher than marginal (Low). HADD is considered likely in streams with a Moderate-High Sensitivity Rating and where construction will occur outside the instream work window proposed (Table 2).

2.2 Quantification of HADD The HADD of fish habitat is likely to result during pipeline construction at 17 watercourse crossings along the Proposed Route. A summary of these crossings and the area of HADD (m2) that will be created are provided in Table 3. The various HADDs have been divided into that occurring instream and that on the adjacent bench/riparian edge. Note that the HADD as calculated in Table 3 includes that portion of the channel that will be disrupted, plus the riparian bench either side of the channel cleared to make way for the temporary vehicle crossing and trench.

In general, vegetation and tree growth immediately next to the channel through to a river’s bench provides woody debris, leaf litter (food for aquatic invertebrates), overhead cover, and instream velocity break(s) for fishes when it falls into a channel. It is assumed that the bench down through bank edge will be cleared for both the trench and temporary vehicle access at each of the crossings (including the Fiddle, Snaring and Athabasca rivers which have no riparian bench per se; rather they lie within a wide, cobble flood plain at the right–of-way (ROW). It is acknowledged that up to 30 m back from bankside in channels up to 20 m wide provides shade and temperature regulation (albeit modest) for the channel section affected. Multiplying channel width by width of trench disturbance yields the HADD to occur instream. Multiplication of the length of the riparian bench edge (channel edge to riparian buffer as derived from aerial photographs) by the width of the anticipated disturbance yields the riparian HADD anticipated. It generally understood that the entire riparian buffer does not necessarily contribute to cover and shade elements for fish habitat integrity. Typically, it is the riparian areas that influence canopy closure (overhead cover and/or cooling of the channel) which have been included in the calculation of riparian HADD (up to 30 m away from bank edge) based on bench location and channel width.

The area of HADD (channel disruption) anticipated has been calculated from the channel width, width of trench required, substrate of the watercourse, and required final elevation (depth) of the

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

pipeline. The area resulting from the loss of riparian vegetation has been calculated by multiplying the width of the trench from the high water mark up to the bench (up to 10 m when loss of canopy closure results) added to that anticipated for the temporary vehicle crossing. While not directly constituting HADD, the proponent acknowledges the importance of riparian margins as fish habitat as identified in such documents as the Fish Protection Act Streamside Management Regulation (Government of BC 2001).

Table 2 Summary of Fish-Bearing or Potential Fish-Bearing Crossings

Crossing KL/KP ID. # 2 Watercourse HADD Rationale Risk1 312.0 C Unnamed Channel No Non-fish-bearing. Open cut with sediment control measures 317.0 I Unnamed Channel No Moderate Sensitivity Rating. Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed. 338.0 9 Unnamed Channel No Moderate Sensitivity Rating. Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed. 338.1 9.1 Unnamed Channel No Moderate Sensitivity Rating. Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed. 354.1 15 Unnamed Channel No No instream activity: Bore 371.9 23 ‘Sucker Creek’ No No instream activity. 375.0 24 Cottonwood Creek No Isolate with fish salvage inside window proposed. Low risk (only spring spawners present and plan is to cross in winter). Low Risk 379.1 24a Cabin Creek No No instream activity 382.4 27a Unnamed Channel No No instream activity 386.8 29 Conifer Creek No Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed. 387.0 29b Unnamed Channel No Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed. 395.9 33 Unnamed Channel No Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed. 409.1 A25 Unnamed Channel No Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed. 412.8 53 Unnamed Channel No Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed. 413.9 54 Unnamed Channel No Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed. 428.6 A49 Grant Brook Creek No Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed. 460.5 A80 Unnamed Channel No Isolate with fish salvage within window proposed.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

Table 2 Continued… Crossing KL/KP ID. # 2 Watercourse HADD Rationale Risk1 Isolate with fish salvage within 383.2 27.5 Miette River Yes window proposed. 390.3 A12 Meadow Creek Yes Open cut outside window proposed Isolate with fish salvage within 396.3 34 Miette River Yes window proposed. Moderate Isolate with fish salvage within Risk 405.4 A22 Miette River Yes window proposed. Isolate with fish salvage outside 411.6 52 Rockingham Creek Yes window proposed. Isolate with fish salvage outside 416.4 A27 Yellowhead Creek Yes window proposed. Isolate with fish salvage outside 327.8 R4 Fiddle River Yes window proposed. Open cut within instream window 337.4 8A Athabasca River Yes proposed. Isolate with fish salvage outside 341.7 10 ‘Devona Creek’ Yes window proposed. Isolate with fish salvage outside 352.2 13.5 ‘Pretty Creek' Yes window proposed. 360.2 21a Snaring River Yes Open cut outside window proposed Snaring River side Isolate with fish salvage outside 360.3 21b Yes High Risk channel window proposed. Isolate with fish salvage outside 385.9 28 Muhigan Creek Yes window proposed. Isolate with fish salvage outside 394.8 32 Clairvaux Creek Yes window proposed. Isolate with fish salvage within 400.0 A16 Derr Creek Yes window proposed. Isolate with fish salvage outside 433.3 A56 Moose River Yes window proposed. Open cut within instream window 458.1 A72 Fraser River Yes proposed.

Notes 1 Crossing risk was determined using a combination of construction schedule timing (whether trench would be excavated inside, or outside the permitted instream work window), fish species and the nature and extent of riverine habitat present, and /or proximity to a known fish-bearing watercourse downstream. 2 Watercourse ID number is derived from AAR (2005a).

2.3 Site-Specific Compensation Since most watercourses within JNP and MRPP are considered pristine, compensation options have been identified for those watercourses where there is existing access and ground disturbance is minimized. Compensation planned will reflect objectives presented in the Environmental Assessment completed for the Project (TERA/Westland 2005a). It will focus on

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

improvement to, or addition of living spaces for native fishes in both JNP and MRPP. Enhancement of habitat instream will not occur within affected channels (Table 3).

Again, the need to compensate is driven by proximity to major fish-bearing watercourses, individual life-history stages that are present and vulnerable at the time of construction, or the habitat crossed is important for a specific life-history stage or species and may, or may not be, used at the time construction occurs. It is the disruption of the habitat and temporary destruction of its viability that is being compensated for. Only DFO can make the decision that HADD will result from works instream; what follows is a summary of those crossings were HADD is anticipated, based on detailed fish and fish habitat assessments, the timing of work proposed and an overall sensitivity of the crossing. A detailed summary of these watercourses can be found in the fish-bearing atlas for the Proposed Route (AAR 2005a). This list of crossings for which HADD is anticipated (Table 3) was refined following meetings and telephone conversations between DFO, Parks Canada, and BC Ministry of Environment and is intended to assist DFO in the decision making process. During these meetings, Parks Canada staff expressed support for restoring ecological integrity through aquatic connectivity while recognizing that on right-of-way habitat enhancement as a form of compensation would only benefit fish present in the waterbody which often includes non-native species.

Table 3 Summary of HADD Anticipated at Selected Watercourses by the Project

Estimated Instream Total Waterbody KP/KL Cause of HADD Riparian HADD (m2) HADD (m2) HADD (m2) Jasper National Park Isolation outside work Fiddle River KL 327.8 556.0 0.0 556.0 window proposed Trenched open cut Athabasca River KP 337.4 3,410.0 0.0 3,410.0 inside window Isolation outside work ‘Devona Creek’ KL/KP 341.7 13.4 260.0 273.4 window proposed Isolation outside work ‘Pretty Creek’ KL/KP 352.2 30.9 260.0 290.9 window proposed Open cut outside Snaring River KL 360.2 work window 723.0 0.0 723.0 proposed Snaring River Isolation outside work KL 360.2 77.0 390.0 857.0 side channel window proposed Isolation inside work Miette River KL/KP 383.2 340.0 780.0 1,120.0 window proposed Isolation outside work Muhigan Creek KL/KP 385.9 39.6 780.0 819.6 window proposed Open cut outside Meadow Creek KL 390.3 work window 80.0 0.0 80.0 proposed

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

Table 3 Continued… Estimated Instream Total Waterbody KP/KL Cause of HADD Riparian HADD (m2) HADD (m2) HADD (m2) Isolation outside KL/KP 394. Clairvaux Creek work window 86.1 390.0 476.1 8 proposed KL/KP 396. Isolation inside work Miette River 263.0 260.0 523.0 3 window proposed Isolation inside work Derr Creek KL 400.0 118.3 560.0 678.3 window proposed Isolation inside work Miette River KL 405.4 190.0 1,560.0 208.0 window proposed Subtotal of HADD 11,557.3 Mount Robson Provincial Park Isolation outside Rockingham KP 411.6 work window 102.9 0.0 102.9 Creek proposed Isolation outside Yellowhead KL 416.4 work window 175.0 660.0 835.0 Creek proposed Isolate outside work Moose River KL 433.3 590.0 1,560.0 2,150.0 window proposed Open cut inside Fraser River KL 458.1 work window 478.0 2,400.0 2,878.0 proposed

Subtotal of HADD 5,965.9

Grand Total of HADD 17,523.2

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

3.0 PROPOSED PROJECT-SPECIFIC COMPENSATION

3.1 Restoration All watercourses where an open cut or isolation method is proposed will have instream and riparian habitat restored and, in some cases, enhanced. A full description of the restoration methods proposed for each of the waterbodies can be found in Tables 4.1 and 4.2 of the Environmental Protection and Restoration Plans: Volume II (TERA/Westland 2005b).

3.2 Jasper National Park, Alberta Specific extant culverts within JNP have been identified as barriers to fishes and other aquatic life (e.g., water shrews). A program of culvert replacement is proposed by Terasen Pipelines. Culvert replacement will ensure that ecological continuity of aquatic fauna (and others) is maintained within the lowermost reaches of watercourses which flow into the Athabasca River within the Park. Of several culverts known to create barriers for fish movement, six crossings have been selected where access is simple and there are consequences for fishes and other fauna that require unobstructed travel. The combined total of aquatic habitat units gained is presented in Table 4. Table 4 Project-Specific Compensation off Right-of-Way Estimated Barrier to Waterbody Location of Culvert Fish Habitat Area Gained Channel Fish? Wide (m2) Jasper National Park Snaring Reservoir Snaring Road Yes 1,543.8 Creek (UTM 425603 – 5879425) (~475 m long X 3.25 m wide) ‘Devona Creek’ Snaring Road Yes 1,955.0 (UTM 431282 – 5888694) (~850 m long X 2.3 m wide) ‘Devona Creek’ Devona Road Yes 3,910.0 (UTM 432534 – 5888958) (1,700 m long X 2.3 m wide) Unnamed Channel Highway 93A Yes 2,550.0 (UTM 432240 – 5847193) (1,700 m long X 1.5 m wide) Unnamed Channel Maligne Range Road Yes 1,715.0 (UTM 431519 – 5865603) (910 m long X 1.5 m wide + 350 m-2) Unnamed Channel Brule Campsite Road Yes 2,550.0 (UTM 441273 – 5897256) (510 m long X 5 m wide) Subtotal 14,223.8 Mount Robson Provincial Park Yellowhead Creek Highway 16 During High 27,500.0 (UTM 392485 – 5856880) Flow (1,100 m long X 25 m wide) Yellowhead Lake Lucerne Station Road During Low 643,500.0 (UTM 395202 – 5857504) Flow (west end of Yellowhead Lake) Subtotal 671,000.0 Total Compensation Habitat Area = 685,223.8 Ratio of Compensation to HADD = 39:1

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

Restoring Connectivity for Mountain Whitefish Rearing Habitat AAR (2005a) reported that Snaring Reservoir Creek provides rearing habitat for juvenile mountain whitefish based on the results of a fish population inventory completed through the Proposed Route. The authors also reported that the culvert on Snaring Road, about 90 m upstream from the Proposed Route, is a barrier to fish movement upstream (Table 4). As such the culvert isolates about 0.5 km of channel above the road (Table 4). Removal of this culvert barrier will benefit mountain whitefish by almost doubling habitat available for rearing in the creek.

Restoring Connectivity for Bull Trout Habitat The existing culvert under Maligne Range Road is currently a barrier to fish. Replacement of the culvert with an arch/open bottom type structure would provide fish passage and access to nearly a kilometer of aquatic habitat, making this a good candidate for removal (W. Hughson, JNP, pers. comm.). This channel is also spring fed, making it particularly suitable for bull trout spawning.

Bull Trout & Athabasca Rainbow Trout Habitat Expansion via Brook Trout Extirpation – Pilot Project Brook trout were the only species captured in ‘Devona Creek’ through the Proposed Route (AAR 2005a). This species is non-native and where it has been planted historically, or invaded passively, it has competitively excluded, and/or has hybridized with native species. Bull trout (char) and Athabasca rainbow trout are native to the upper Athabasca River in JNP. Both species used to reside in ‘Devona Creek’ (M.G. Sullivan, ASRD, pers. comm., AAR 2005a). It is Terasen’s intention to increase the connectivity between the Athabasca River by eliminating the two culvert barriers and restoring unimpeded fish passage within ‘Devona Creek’ and between the creek and mainstem Athabasca River.

To this end Terasen proposes to:

1. Complete a reach-based analysis of habitat within Devona Creek. 2. Electrofish representative sections within each reach to determine fish species composition, relative abundance and distribution within the creek relative to each of the culverts. All brook trout captured during the initial synoptic inventory of fishes will be sacrificed. 3. Once a clear understanding of fish distribution relative to the culverts is made, then the creek will be electrofished intensively using removal-depletion techniques until no more brook trout are encountered. Brook trout removed from ‘Devona Creek’ will be disposed of appropriately. 4. Removal-depletion will be undertaken in a stepwise manner from the downstream-most part of ‘Devona Creek’ upstream through each of the culverts as is deemed necessary. For example, if no fish are found upstream from the Snaring Road, then removal- depletion electrofishing will cease at the exit to the culvert under the road.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

5. Remove barriers and re-install fish friendly crossings at Devona and Snaring roads. 6. Follow-up synoptic electrofishing in ‘Devona Creek’ to determine whether brook trout remain after-the-fact. This sampling will occur at least one season after initial removal- depletion is complete.

Habitat Availability Versus Use To determine whether native fishes will recolonize ‘Devona Creek’ once it is free of brook trout, bull trout and rainbow trout captured that are >180 mm in fork length (FL) from the Athabasca at the mouth of ‘Devona Creek’ will receive radio transmitter implants. Today's radio transmitters are tiny and long-lived. Terasen proposes to implant up to ten transmitters, each with about one year battery life, in trout and char captured downstream from the barriers in ‘Devona Creek’. These fish will be followed once every two weeks to determine their location within ‘Devona Creek’ (or elsewhere).

Should neither bull trout nor Athabasca rainbow trout be captured, and suitable spawning habitat for both species is present within ‘Devona Creek’, then Terasen will capture pre-spawning adults from the upper Athabasca River and introduce a pair of each species to ‘Devona Creek’. The confluence of ‘Sucker Creek’ and the Athabasca River is a potential source for both species. Introducing long-nose sucker is also of interest in terms of restoring native fish fauna should they be absent from the creek. Again, the emphasis is on the restoration of access within enhanced crossings which posed barriers to the upstream migration of native fishes in ‘Devona Creek’.

The radio-telemetry study will address the merit of improving connectivity for native fishes between habitat units that have been isolated for decades. Terasen should be able to contribute knowledge to the rate at which native fishes can colonize “new” habitat as well as provide insight into movement patterns of fishes in small tributaries to the Athabasca River. Understanding the relationship between habitats for fishes in the tributaries versus that within the mainstem upper Athabasca River will assist in the management of aquatic ecosystems within JNP. Furthermore, this will serve as a pilot study from which Parks Canada (and others) can build on this approach to compensation.

Extirpation of any introduced species is a challenge. Experience doing so with brook trout in southern Alberta has proven challenging (e.g., Quirk Creek brook trout removal program). It has taken several years for native cutthroat trout and bull trout to outnumber introduced brook trout. It is emphasized that Quirk Creek is many times longer and larger than ‘Devona Creek’ and the primary method of extirpation was angling. Terasen Pipelines is proposing an appreciably more intense approach in the removal-depletion electrofishing effort, acknowledging its limitations.

3.3 Mount Robson Provincial Park, British Columbia Fewer options for compensation exist within MRPP than are available with JNP. However, several culverts in the Yellowhead Lake area have been identified that at times act as barriers to fishes and other aquatic life. The two options presented in Table 4 would yield a significant increase in connectivity for aquatic fauna. These options appear to satisfy both DFO and BC Ministry of Environment's objectives.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

Yellowhead Creek: Enhancing Rainbow Trout Habitat During periods of high flow in Yellowhead Creek, the existing culverts under Highway 16 may act as a velocity barrier to smaller fish. There is also evidence to show that under low flow conditions the downstream ends of the culverts become raised (hanging). Minor alterations to the channel downstream of the culverts to slow flow and impound water at the base of the culverts would create a pool and staging area for migrating fishes and reduce the hydraulic gradient within the culverts.

Yellowhead Lake: Connectivity of Aquatic Habitat Lucerne Station Road crosses a narrow portion of Yellowhead Lake between two promontories. The bridge that crossed at this location was replaced by five culverts. During low lake levels the western end of Yellowhead Lake becomes isolated. Replacing these culverts would increase connectivity between the sub-basins of Yellowhead Lake, increasing nursery habitat, summer feeding and wintering habitat for all fishes within. The many-fold increase in area compensation gained would allow for intangibles incurred during each of the pipeline crossings within the TMX – Anchor Loop. The improvement in connectivity between lake basins will not only benefit fishes, but all ecosystem components within Yellowhead Lake.

Restoration of Bull Trout Habitat in Tributary to the Upper Fraser River During fish reconnaissance inventories completed in 2005, brook trout were identified at one location within the upper Fraser River Watershed. Brook trout juveniles were captured in a minnow trap in an unnamed tributary to the Fraser River, 3.1 km from the Miette River (Athabasca River Watershed). This is a significant discovery as it marks the entrance of this species into BC.

While the removal of an established species on a watershed scale would not be without logistical difficulties, it is suspected that it is early enough to successfully extirpate brook trout from this tributary to the upper Fraser River. It has been reported that brook trout competitively exclude bull trout (native to the headwaters of the Fraser River) from nursery and rearing habitat. Furthermore, brook trout can share spawning habitat with bull trout leading to hybridization and genetic pollution of the native bull trout. By eliminating brook trout from the upper Fraser River, competition for habitat for native salmonids will be reduced. It is proposed that a programme be developed in conjunction with BC Ministry of Environment staff to:

a) Map and document the extent of the distribution of brook trout in the Upper Fraser Watershed, then b) Develop a strategic programme to extirpate brook trout from the upper Fraser River tributaries within which brook trout were captured, followed by c) Implementation of brook trout extirpation programme from the tributary watershed. d) Post-extirpation monitoring.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

3.4 Follow-up and Audit of Compensation Measures Following the restoration and implementation of compensation at each site, a follow-up and audit of the relative success of both restoration and compensation prescriptions installed is intended (fish passage and habitat restoration). This will be carried out one summer following completion of pipeline construction and clean-up. This will ensure compliance with DFO conditions for authorization of the HADD, and the overall successfulness of restoration methods (bank stabilization and revegetation). DFO requires that 85% of plantings need to have germinated before restoration is deemed successful.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

4.0 REFERENCES

4.1 Personal Communication Austin, K. Fish Habitat Biologist. Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Clearwater, BC. Personal Communication. Hughson, W. Aquatic Specialist, Parks Canada, Jasper National Park. Jasper, AB. Personal Communication. Kosmider, G. Fish Habitat Biologist. Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Edmonton, AB. Personal Communication. Pillipow, R. Fish Biologist. BC Ministry of Environment. Prince George, BC. Personal Communication. Sullivan, M.G. Provincial Fisheries Science Specialist. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development. Personal Communication. VanVelzen, W. Area Supervisor Mount Robson Provincial Park. Valemount, BC. Personal Communication.

4.2 Literature Cited Alberta Environment. 2001a. Code of Practice for Pipelines and Telecommunications Lines Crossing a Water Body. Queen’s Printer for Alberta, Calgary, Alberta. 24 pp

Alberta Environment. 2001b. Code of Practice for Watercourse Crossings. Queen’s Printer for Alberta, Calgary, Alberta. 26 pp Applied Aquatic Research Ltd. (AAR). 2005a. TMX-Anchor Loop Project: Fish and Fish Habitat Investigations Alberta, Jasper National Park, Mount Robson Provincial Park and British Columbia. Submitted to Tera/Westland, Calgary, Alberta for Kinder Morgan Canada Inc. 38 pp + Appendices. Applied Aquatic Research Ltd. (AAR). 2005b. TMX-Anchor Loop Project: Fish Bearing Atlas Proposed Route. Alberta, Jasper National Park, Mount Robson Provincial Park and British Columbia. Submitted to Tera/Westland, Calgary, Alberta for Kinder Morgan Canada Inc. 42 pp. BC Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. 2004. Reduced Risk Timing Windows and Measurements for the Conservation of Fish and Fish Habitat for the Omineca Region, Effective May 3, 2004. Environmental Stewardship Division. 17 pp Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). 1986. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat. Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). 1998a. Decision framework for the determination and authorization of harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Habitat Management and Environmental Science, Habitat Management Branch, Ottawa, Ontario. Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). 1998b. Habitat Conservation and Protection Guidelines, Second Edition (1998). Developed from the Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat (1986) Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). 2006. Habitat Protection. 3.4 Compensation of residual effects on fish habitat, viewed March 16, 2006. http://www.qc.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/habitat/en/guide_034.htm Government of British Columbia. 2001. Fish Protection Act. Streamside Protection Regulation. B.C. Reg. 10/2001, O.C. 34/2001. Includes amendments up to B.C. Reg. 109/2002. Government of Canada. 1985. Fisheries Act. R.S. 1985, Chapter F-14. Oil and Gas Commission. 2004. Stream Crossing Planning Guide (Northeast BC), Version 1.0. 24 pp.

TERA/Westland. 2005a. Environmental Assessment. Prepared for Terasen Pipelines (Trans Mountain) Inc., Calgary, Alberta. TMX – Anchor Loop Project. TERA/Westland. 2005b. Environmental Protection and Restoration Plans: Volume II. Prepared for Terasen Pipelines (Trans Mountain) Inc., Calgary, Alberta. TMX – Anchor Loop Project.

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

APPENDIX A

Updated TMX – Anchor Loop Waterbody Crossing Summary

Applied Aquatic Research Ltd.

24 6/07/06 TABLE DFO 1.1 UPDATED TMX - ANCHOR LOOP WATERBODY CROSSING SUMMARY

Construction Planning

No fish Open cut with Unnamed Non-Fish Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 311.0 Ephemeral 7 * captured or * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Channel Bearing to bottom to bottom observed control

No fish Open cut with Unnamed Non-Fish Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 311.9 Perennial 4 * captured or * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Channel Bearing to bottom to bottom observed control

No fish Unnamed Non-Fish Open cut if dry or frozen 312.0 Perennial 4 * captured or * Moderate Open Isolate if flowing Type I or Type III NA Standard Isolate Measures * Low Channel Bearing to bottom observed No fish Open cut with Unnamed Non-Fish Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 313.8 Perennial 4 * captured or * Low Open downstream sediment Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Channel Bearing to bottom to bottom observed control Type I or Type III Unnamed Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen Riparian habitat 317.0 Perennial 3 Fish Bearing * BRST, PRDC * Moderate Open (open bottom Standard Isolate Measures Low Channel and monitoring to bottom to bottom restoration structure)

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 325.0 Drystone Creek Intermittent 7 Dry * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or Type V Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control EAST BOUNDARY OF JASPER NATIONAL PARK - 42 crossings, 2 ponds

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if frozen to Type V if dry or frozen 326.1 Unnamed Channel Perennial 2 (NFB) * Moderate Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed bottom to bottom control

Isolate outside window Moderate- Salvage existing 327.8 Fiddle River Perennial 1 Fish Bearing BLTR MNWH * July 1 - August 15 with fish salvage and * Type 1 NA Standard Isolate Measures High High boulder/cobble banks monitoring

Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if frozen to Ice/snow fill over 330.1 Unnamed Pond Lake 10 Fish Bearing * LKCH * Moderate Open Type I or II Standard Isolate Measures * Low and monitoring bottom frozen pond

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 331.5 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 * * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut if frozen to Ice/snow fill over 332 Unnamed Pond Pond 10 Fish Bearing * NA * Low* Open Isolate Type I or II Standard Isolate Measures * Low bottom frozen pond

Roche Miette Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 333.2 Intermittent 7 * * Low Open Isolate if flowing Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Creek Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom

Open cut with Athabasca River Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 336.7 Seasonal 7 Not sampled * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low (side channel) Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control

1 6/07/06 TABLE DFO 1.1 UPDATED TMX - ANCHOR LOOP WATERBODY CROSSING SUMMARY Construction Planning

November 1 to December Open cut with Access from either Moderate- Type II within Riparian habitat 337.4 Athabasca River Perennial 1 Fish Bearing MNWH * * 31 monitoring within * side of existing TMPL Standard Crossing Measures Low High window restoration March 10 to April 30 window route

Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 338 Unnamed Channel Perennial 2 Fish Bearing BURB BURB * Moderate May 1 - December 31 Type I if flowing Standard Isolate Measures * Low and monitoring to bottom to bottom

Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 338.1 Unnamed Channel Perennial 2 Fish Bearing BURB BURB * Moderate May 1 - December 31 Type I if flowing Standard Isolate Measures * Low and monitoring to bottom to bottom

Isolate outside window Moderate- Riparian habitat 341.7 Devona Creek Perennial 3 Fish Bearing BKTR BKTR * May 1 - September 15 with fish salvage and * Type I NA Standard Isolate Measures High High restoration monitoring

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 348 Unnamed Channel Perennial 4 * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 351.3 Vine Creek Perennial 1 (NFB) * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Isolate outside window No fish captured Moderate- Type I or use Riparian habitat 352.2 Pretty Creek Perennial 2 Fish Bearing BKTR * May 1 - September 15 with fish salvage and * NA Standard Isolate Measures High or observed High existing TMPL route restoration monitoring

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if frozen to Type V if dry or frozen 352.7 Corral Creek Perennial 2 (NFB) * Moderate Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed bottom to bottom control

Isolate outside window BKTR, BLTR, BKTR, MNWH, Trenchless with Type I or use Riparian habitat 354.1 Unnamed Channel Perennial 3 Fish Bearing * High July 16 -August 15 with fish salvage and NA Standard Isolate Measures Low RNTR, MNWH BLTR monitoring existing TMPL route restoration monitoring if flowing

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured May 1 - September 15 Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 355.7 Unnamed Channel Perennial 1 (NFB) * Low downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed November 1 - April 15 to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - No fish captured Type V if dry or frozen 357 Unnamed Channel Seasonal 7 * Low Open downstream sediment Open cut Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing dry or observed to bottom control

Type II multispan vehicle crossing or No fish captured Open cut outside 360.2 Snaring River Perennial 1 Fish Bearing * * Moderate July 16 - August 15 * Type I access from either Standard Crossing Measures * High or observed window side of existing TMPL route

2 6/07/06 TABLE DFO 1.1 UPDATED TMX - ANCHOR LOOP WATERBODY CROSSING SUMMARY Construction Planning

RNTR, Isolate outside window Snaring River (side Not sampled - BLTR, RNTR, Moderate- 360.3 Perennial 2 Fish Bearing MNWH, July 16 - August 15 with fish salvage and Open cut outside window Type I NA Standard Isolate Measures * High channel) dangerous MNWH High BLTR monitoring if flowing

Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 361.5 Unnamed Channel Seasonal 7 NA Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing dry or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 361.6 Unnamed Channel Seasonal 7 NA Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Type V if dry or frozen 366.2 Palisades Creek Perennial 2 (NFB) * Moderate Open downstream sediment * Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom control

No instream activity - Standard Isolate Measures; BKTR, BLTR, Isolate with fish salvage Riparian habitat 371.9 Sucker Creek Perennial 1 Fish Bearing BKTR, MNWH * High July 1 - August 15 install in road shoulder Use Highway NA Maintain erosion barrier to Low LNDC, LNSC and monitoring restoration above existing culvert prevent sediment input.

Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Not sampled - no Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 372.1 Pyramid Creek Intermittent 7 * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing dry water to streambed to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - no Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 372.2 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing water to streambed to bottom control

Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Riparian habitat 375 Cottonwood Creek Perennial 3 Fish Bearing RNTR RNTR * High July 16 - April 1 Type I NA Standard Isolate Measures Low and monitoring to bottom restoration

BLTR, RNTR, No instream activity - Isolate with fish salvage 379.1 Cabin Creek Perennial 2 Fish Bearing BKTR, RNTR * Moderate-High July 16 - August 15 Use old railway bed NA Standard Isolate Measures * Low BKTR, LNSC extend existing culvert and monitoring

BKTR, RNTR, Moderate- No instream activity - Open cut if dry or frozen Riparian habitat 382.4 Unnamed Channel Perennial 1 Fish Bearing BKTR NA July 16 - September 15 Use old railway bed Type II Standard Isolate Measures Low LKCH, LNDC High extend existing culvert to bottom restoration

Isolate within window Access from either BLTR, Moderate- April 5 - April 15 Riparian habitat 383.2 Miette River Perennial 1 Fish Bearing ** with fish salvage and Open cut within window Type I or II side of existing TMPL Standard Isolate Measures Moderate MNWH High July 16 - August 15 restoration* monitoring route

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if frozen to Type V if dry or frozen 383.8 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish Open cut if frozen to Type V if dry or frozen 384.2 Unnamed Pond Pond 10 NA NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * None Bearing bottom to bottom control

Isolate outside window MNWH, RNTR, Open cut if dry or frozen Riparian habitat 385.9 Muhigan Creek Perennial 2 Fish Bearing BKTR * High July 16 - August 30 with fish salvage and Type I Type III Standard Isolate Measures High BKTR to bottom restoration monitoring

No fish captured Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 386.8 Conifer Creek Perennial 3 Fish Bearing RNTR, UNID * Moderate-High Open Type I or Type III Standard Isolate Measures * Low or observed and monitoring to bottom to bottom

3 6/07/06 TABLE DFO 1.1 UPDATED TMX - ANCHOR LOOP WATERBODY CROSSING SUMMARY Construction Planning

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 386.9 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

No fish captured May 1 - September 15 Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 387 Unnamed Channel Perennial 3 Fish Bearing BKTR * Moderate Type I or III Standard Isolate Measures * Low or observed November 1 - April 15 and monitoring to bottom to bottom

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 388.2 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 Not sampled * Low Open downstream sediment Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control

No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 388.5 Unnamed Channel Ephemeral 7 Fish Bearing Not sampled * Low Open Isolate with monitoring. Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low or observed to bottom to bottom

BKTR, RNTR Moderate - habitat Open cut outside Open cut if dry or frozen Riparian habitat 390.3 Meadow Creek Perennial 2 Fish Bearing RNTR Not sampled captured, MNWH Moderate July 16 - September 15 Type I Type II Standard Crossing Measures previously modified by window with monitoring to bottom restoration observed bridge construction

Isolate outside window Moderate- Riparian habitat 394.8 Clairvaux Creek Perennial 2 Fish Bearing BKTR, RNTR ** July 16 - September 15 with fish salvage and * Type I Type II Standard Isolate Measures High High restoration monitoring

Isolate if flowing with May 1 - September 15 Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 395.9 Unnamed Channel Perennial 2 Fish Bearing Not sampled BKTR, LKCH * Moderate monitoring and fish Type I or III if flowing Standard Isolate Measures * Low November 1 - April 15 to bottom to bottom salvage

Isolate within window Moderate- April 5 - April 15 Open cut within window Riparian habitat 396.3 Miette River Perennial 1 Fish Bearing MNWH ** with fish salvage and Type I Type II Standard Isolate Measures Moderate High July 16 - August 15 with monitoring restoration monitoring

Isolate within window BURB, MNWH, Replace existing Riparian habitat 400.0 Derr Creek Perennial 2 Fish Bearing BURB, MNWH * High July 1 - August 15 with fish salvage and * Type III Standard Isolate Measures Low BKTR, BLTR bridge restoration monitoring

Isolate within window Open cut outside window Riparian habitat 405.4 Miette River Perennial 1 Fish Bearing * * * Moderate November 1 - April 15 with fish salvage and Type I Type II Standard Isolate Measures Low with monitoring restoration monitoring

WEST BOUNDARY OF JASPER NATIONAL PARK / EAST BOUNDARY OF MOUNT ROBSON PROVINCIAL PARK - 48 crossings, 1 pond Deviate centreline No fish captured Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Type III or IV if Type V if dry or frozen 409.1 Unnamed Channel Perennial 5 Fish Bearing LNC LKC, EB Moderate Open Standard Isolate Measures downstream of Low or observed and monitoring to bottom flowing to bottom cascade

4 6/07/06 TABLE DFO 1.1 UPDATED TMX - ANCHOR LOOP WATERBODY CROSSING SUMMARY Construction Planning

Isolate outside window Open cut within proposed Riparian habitat 411.6 Rockingham Creek Perennial 1 Fish Bearing RB, BB NA * Moderate July 16 - September 15 with fish salvage and Type I Type II Standard Isolate Measures Moderate work window restoration monitoring

Ice cover No fish captured Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Type III (open Type V if dry or frozen 412.8 Unnamed Channel Perennial 3 Fish Bearing precluded RB Moderate July 16 - April 1 Standard Isolate Measures * Low or observed and monitoring to bottom bottom structure) to bottom sampling

No fish captured No fish captured Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 413.9 Unnamed Channel Perennial 5 Fish Bearing LKC Moderate Open Type I or III if flowing Standard Isolate Measures * Low or observed or observed and monitoring to bottom to bottom

No fish captured Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen 414.4 Unnamed Wetland Wetland 10 Fish Bearing Not sampled RB Moderate July 16 - April 1 Type I or III if flowing NA Standard Isolate Measures * Low or observed and monitoring to bottom.

Isolate outside window Yellowhead Open cut if dry or frozen Riparian habitat 416.4 Perennial 1 Fish Bearing RB * * Moderate June 16 - August 15 with fish salvage and Type I Type II Standard Isolate Measures Moderate Creek to bottom restoration monitoring

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 419.6 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type III (open Type V if dry or frozen 423.4 Cottonwood Creek Perennial 4 Fish Bearing * Low-Moderate Open downstream sediment Standard Crossing Measures * Low or observed or observed to bottom bottom structure) to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 424.5 Unnamed channel Intermittent 7 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 424.8 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 425.4 Unnamed Channel Ephemeral 7 NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control

Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 425.7 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 Not sampled * Low Open Isolate if flowing Type III if flowing Standard Isolate Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom

Use existing CN Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Riparian habitat 428.6 Grant Brook Perennial 1 Fish Bearing LNC, RB, BB * * Moderate-High July 16 - December 31 access road and Type I or Type II Standard Isolate Measures Low and monitoring to bottom restoration bridge

Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if frozen to Type V if dry or frozen 431.6 Unnamed Channel Perennial 2 (NFB) * Low Open Isolate if flowing Type I or III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed bottom to bottom

Trenchless with Moderate- monitoring, pending Isolate outside window Standard Trenchless Riparian habitat 433.3 Moose River Perennial 1 Fish Bearing MW, CRI, BT ** July 1 - August 15 Type I or II NA Low High geotechnical with monitoring Measures restoration investigation

5 6/07/06 TABLE DFO 1.1 UPDATED TMX - ANCHOR LOOP WATERBODY CROSSING SUMMARY Construction Planning

Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 435.9 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 * * Low Open downstream sediment Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing too steep to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 438.9 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 439.3 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 439.3 Unnamed Channel Ephemeral 7 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing dry or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 439.4 Unnamed Channel Ephemeral 6 Not sampled * Low Open downstream sediment Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 439.5 Unnamed Channel Perennial 4 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Not sampled - Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 439.9 Unnamed Channel Perennial 4 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing too steep too steep to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 439.9 NCD NCD 7 NA NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Intermittent/ Non-Fish Not sampled - Not sampled - Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 440.4 Unnamed Channel 7 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III Standard Crossing Measures * Low Ephemeral Bearing too steep too steep to bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 444.6 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 Not sampled * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish no fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 445.4 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 Not sampled * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control

Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 446.3 Unnamed Channel Perennial 4 * Low-Moderate Open Isolate if flowing Type III if flowing Standard Isolate Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom

Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Isolate with monitoring if Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 447.1 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 * Low Open Type III if flowing Standard Isolate Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed flowing to bottom to bottom

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 448.3 Unnamed Channel Perennial 4 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 448.6 Unnamed Channel Perennial 4 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Isolate with monitoring if Open cut if dry or frozen Type III (open Type V if dry or frozen 449.2 Woodley Creek Perennial 4 * Low Open Standard Isolate Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed flowing to bottom bottom structure) to bottom

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 449.4 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 * Moderate Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

6 6/07/06 TABLE DFO 1.1 UPDATED TMX - ANCHOR LOOP WATERBODY CROSSING SUMMARY Construction Planning

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 450.2 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 * Moderate Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed or observed to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 451.3 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 Not sampled * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 452.2 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control

7 6/07/06 TABLE DFO 1.1 UPDATED TMX - ANCHOR LOOP WATERBODY CROSSING SUMMARY Construction Planning

unidentified fish No fish captured Isolate with fish salvage Open cut if dry or frozen Use Highway (50 m 452.7 Unnamed Channel Perennial 2 Fish Bearing * Low July 16 to August 15 Type I or Type II Standard Isolate Measures * Low observed or observed and monitoring if flowing to bottom downstream)

Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Not sampled - no Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 456.6 Unnamed Channel Ephemeral 7 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing no water water to bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - no Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 456.7 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing water to bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Not sampled - no Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 456.8 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing no water water to bottom to bottom control

Riparian habitat Open cut within Moderate- July 16 - August 15 restoration if 458.1 Fraser River Perennial 1 Fish Bearing RB, MW * * proposed work window * Type I Type II Standard Crossing Measures High High November 1 - April 15 contingency crossing with fish salvage method implemented

Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 458.8 Unnamed Channel Perennial 4 NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing too steep to bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 459.1 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing too steep to bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 459.2 Unnamed Channel Perennial 4 NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing too steep to bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 459.4 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing too steep to bottom to bottom control

Isolate with monitoring Open cut if frozen to 460.5 Unnamed Channel Perennial 2 Fish Bearing RB * * Moderate July 16 to April 1 Type I NA Standard Isolate Measures * Low and fish salvage bottom

Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 461 Unnamed Channel Perennial 4 NA * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing too steep to bottom to bottom control

Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Not sampled - Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 462.5 Unnamed Channel Perennial 6 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * None Bearing or observed barrier to bottom to bottom control Open cut with Non-Fish Not sampled - Not sampled - Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 463.1 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing dry dry to bottom to bottom control

Non-Fish No fish captured Isolate with monitoring if Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 465.9 Cochrane Creek Perennial 2 (NFB) NA * Low Open Type I Standard Isolate Measures * Low Bearing or observed flowing to bottom to bottom

WEST BOUNDARY OF MOUNT ROBSON PROVINCIAL PARK - 2 crossings Open cut with Non-Fish No fish captured Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 466.4 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 Not sampled * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing or observed to bottom to bottom control

8 6/07/06 TABLE DFO 1.1 UPDATED TMX - ANCHOR LOOP WATERBODY CROSSING SUMMARY Construction Planning

Preliminary Method, Pipeline Crossing Preliminary Method, Vehicle KP 1 Preliminary Protection Measures Species Species Species of Stream Access Across Stream Waterbody Waterbody TMX Fish Fish Instream Work Preliminary Crossing Present Present Present Name Type 2 Class 3 presence Sensitivity Window Proposed Risk (Fall) 4 (Spring) 4 (Summer) 4 1 KL Enhancement and Primary Contingency Primary Contingency Mitigation and Restoration Follow-up Open cut with Non-Fish Open cut if dry or frozen Type V if dry or frozen 467.7 Unnamed Channel Intermittent 7 Not sampled Not sampled * Low Open downstream sediment Type III if flowing Standard Crossing Measures * Low Bearing to bottom to bottom control END OF ANCHOR LOOP - Total: 98 crossings + 3 ponds = 101 waterbodies

Notes: Distances along the "existing TMPL route" are referred to by KP. These are approximate and based upon a linear distance mapped along the Existing TMPL Route. KL's have been used for sites along the "proposed route" and are a linear 1 distance derived from the adjacent existing TMPL route or surveyed stakes.

2 Water Body Type: Perennial = A watercourse that flows year round, vary in size, provide year round habitat for fish Seasonal = A watercouse that flows for part of the year only Intermittent = Usually a function of seasonality. Generally do not dry up completely, may retain water in isolated pools or connected by sub-surface flow. Can represent important migration routes or spawning or rearing habitat. Ephemeral = A watercourse present at different periods in time. Variance may span years, with watercourse becoming vegetated during periods of no flow. NVC = No Visible Channel; a depression with no visible bed or banks and no direct/indirect fisheries potential. NCD = Non Classified Drainage; British Columbia designation for a watercourse with a continuous channel less than 100 m in length and no direct/indirect fisheries potential. Wetland = An area of swamp, marsh, or other similar habitat with distinct vegetation and where the water table is at, near or above the surface.

3 TMX Classification: Vehicle Crossing Methods 1 Very Large (>20 m) watercourse with fisheries potential Type I Single span bridge 2 Large (>5m - 20 m) watercourse with fisheries potential Type II Multi span bridge 3 Medium (1.5m - 5m) watercourse with direct / indirect fisheries potential Type III Ramp and culvert, or ramp and open bottom culvert (where 4 Medium (1.5m - 5m) watercourse with no fisheries potential specified) 5 Small (<1.5 m) permanent watercourse with direct / indirect fisheries potential Type IV Fords 6 Small (<1.5 m) permanent watercourse with no direct / indirect fisheries potential Type V Log or snowfill 7 Seasonal/intermittent watercourse with direct / indirect fisheries potential 8 Seasonal/intermittent watercourse with no fisheries potential; includes NCD 9 No Visible Channel (NVC) 10 Wetland, lake or pond (NFB) Denotes Non Fish Bearing for TMX Classification 1 & 2 Note: TMX Classes 8 and 9 are not included in the table because they do not have direct or indirect fisheries potential. Denotes change to pipeline and vehicle crossing methods based on latest geotechnical information.

4 Species: Alberta British Columbia Bull Trout BLTR BT Brook Trout BKTR EB Rainbow Trout RNTR RB Mountain White Fish MNWH MW Northern Pike NRPK NP Burbot BURB BB Longnose Sucker LNSC LSU White Sucker WHSC WSU Lake Chub LKCH LKC Longnose Dace LNDC LNC Spoonhead Sculpin SPSC CRI Chinook Salmon CH Pearl Dace PRDC PDC

BT/DV Historically Dolly Varden were reported in BC but since the distinction of the species with Bull Trout it is suspected that the DV are most likely bull trout

* Based on sampling conducted in other areas of waterbody.