Post on 26-Jun-2020
Developing a Recovery Strategy for Brook Trout in the Credit River Watershed
Phil Bird
CVC Fisheries Technician
Overview
• History of Brook Trout – Abundance, Distribution and Management
• Monitoring Results and Current Status
• Brook Trout Workshop and Recovery Strategy
History• Thousands were
harvested from small inland lakes and ponds through the ice in the early 1870’s
• An estimated 2500 pounds were harvested from the headwaters in 1871
• In 1927, still considered to be common, especially upstream of the Forks
• In 1927, documented in a Lake Ontario tributary in present day Mississauga
History• As early as 1820, saw and grist
mills wereconstructed on the Credit and its
tributaries• There were at least 61 mills in
the watershed between 1851 and 1852
• In 1858-59, there were 83 mills
-(Dept. Planning & Development, 1957).
History“Brook Trout were formerly found in all the clear spring streams, and lakes fed by them, throughout the Province, but of late years, owing to the pollution of our waters and excessive fishing, its range is restricted to the unsettled districts, and except where its is artificially propagated and preserved it has ceased to exist in southern Ontario”
- C. W. Nash, 1908. Manual of Vertebrates of Ontario
Stocking
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
Tota
l # S
tock
ed
Brook Trout Brown Trout Rainbow Trout
Total number of Brook Trout, Brown Trout and Rainbow Trout Stocked by MNR Maple District (Peel and Dufferin Counties) in
the Credit River watershed (1949-1971)
History1950’s• Conservation Report for the
Credit Valley (1956)• Twenty major obstacles to
movement of fish identified• Not found south of
Georgetown except one tributary in Streetsville or in main stem below Credit Forks
• In 1958, many dead brook trout found downstream of Orangeville STP outlet
Recent History1980s – Present
• Special regulations introduced for Forks of The Credit Provincial Park area
• CVC embarks on watershed fisheries monitoring program (1999)
• MNR refines special fishing regulations
• Fisheries Management Plan completed in 2002
• Some small scale stocking of private lands continues
Current Distribution
• Distribution in FMP was overestimated due to lack of data
• Current distribution is based on CVC Fisheries Monitoring Program and collection records from MNR, ROM, consultants etc.
Current Distribution
• Loss of some populations • Remnant populations exist in all
subwatersheds upstream of the Niagara Escarpment
• Longest stretches of contiguous habitat:– West Credit, Erin to Belfountain– Black Creek, upstream of Stewarttown
y = -0.2274x + 4.9348R2 = 0.4438
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Year
Mea
n Bi
omas
s (g
/m^2
)
22 Stations; n = 196; p = 0.01
y = -0.0076x + 0.1697R2 = 0.4214
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Year
Mea
n De
nsity
(# o
f ind
ivid
uals
/m^2
)
22 Stations; n = 196; p = 0.02
Hwy 10
y = -0.0183x + 0.213R2 = 0.4659
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Year
Dens
ity (#
of i
ndiv
idua
ls /
m^2
)
Real-time Water Quality (DO vs Temp)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
09-Aug-12 11-Aug-12 13-Aug-12 15-Aug-12 17-Aug-12 19-Aug-12 21-Aug-12 23-Aug-12 25-Aug-12 27-Aug-12 29-Aug-12
Dis
solv
ed O
xyge
n (m
g/L)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Wat
er T
empe
ratu
re (o C
)
DO Temp
Real-time WQ (DO vs Water Level)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
09-Aug-12 11-Aug-12 13-Aug-12 15-Aug-12 17-Aug-12 19-Aug-12 21-Aug-12 23-Aug-12 25-Aug-12 27-Aug-12 29-Aug-12
Diss
olve
d O
xyge
n (m
g/L)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Wat
er L
evel
(m)
DO WaterLevel
y = -0.185x + 1.7681R2 = 0.6011
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Year
Biom
ass
(g/m
^2)
n = 10; p= 0.01
y = -0.057x + 1.0447R2 = 0.3926
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Year
Den
sity
(# o
f ind
ivid
uals
/ m
^2)
Caledon Creek n = 12; p < 0.05
Strongholds / Islands
y = -0.8865x + 11.368R2 = 0.4857
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Year
Biom
ass
(g/m
^2)
Credit River @ Hwy 24 n = 7; p = 0 08
Strongholds / Islands
y = -1.3318x + 22.972R2 = 0.3964
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Year
Bio
mas
s (g
/m^2
)
Upper Shaw’s Creek n = 11; p > 0 05
Improvement / Recovery?
y = 0.0101x + 0.0142R2 = 0.4027
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Year
Dens
ity (#
of i
ndiv
idua
ls /
m^2
)
Black Creek d/s Acton STP n = 11; p < 0 05
The Hospital Trib
Fall 1998; Photo Credit: John Kendell
Conclusions on Status
• Isolation / receding distributions • Marked decline downstream of Orangeville• Declines in Main River• Declines in ‘core’ areas• Population loss
Cause for Optimism?• Many viable populations exist and have survived previous impacts and
bottlenecks • These subpopulations can realistically be reconnected to additional
subpopulations and habitats
• Local source populations exist to naturally re-colonize restored areas and expand the species’ range
• These fish are still here and so is the habitat. It is our job to provide the restoration to fill in the gaps
Toward a Brook Trout Recovery Strategy
• 7 major issues identified:-Urbanization -Water Taking -WWTP-Climate Change -Dams and Barriers -Competition
• Same approach/framework as CRFMP where CVC/MNR developed strategies/tactics with input from stakeholders.
• Major strategies requiring more specific tactics to address 7 major issues
• No expectations for new solutions, just more focused on Brook Trout as most sensitive headwater indicator with well known requirements/targets that will benefit all downstream fish communities.
Toward a Brook Trout Recovery Strategy
Brook Trout Workshop – September 12, 2012
• 33 attendees (agency staff, local NGOs)• Monitoring data presented• Issues tabled with draft Strategies and
associated Tactics (consistent with FMP)
URBANIZATION: Tactics• Can we utilize known thresholds of urbanization,
percent impervious or development index to limit further development or require better impact assessments and mitigation?
• Apply new Water Budget and Ecological Flow Requirements to support LID.
• SWM cost recovery needed to provide incentives to landowners via tax reductions?
• Stronger requirements of SWM pond maintenance and retrofits, sediment controls and enforcement still remain issues
• Apply new Thermal Mitigation Guidelines for SWM ponds.
WATER TAKING: Tactics• Historical baseflow trend analysis needed that
separates out WWTP discharges • New municipal wells or cumulative increases over
time largest issue • Utilize Source Water Protection water budgets and
flow path tracking given brook trout areas highly correlated with municipal wells.
• Promote and require more water conservation via new Low Water Response Teams.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS: Tactics
• Incorporate fish monitoring and targets into COA.• Require continuous DO monitoring and address
violations documented.• Require cumulative impact assessment related to
increases in baseflows and aquatic vegetation growth. Research/monitor inputs such as pharmaceuticals and synergistic effects.
• Better prepare for 2 new WWTPs on high priority brook trout populations.
CLIMATE CHANGE: Tactics
• Traditional protection and restoration will increase overall resiliency.
• Reduced flows vs. floods greatest concern. Focus on recharge area enhancement rather than instream solutions.
• Mitigate/remove dams to improve thermal regimes and to reconnect populations for increased resiliency.
DAMS & BARRIERS: Tactics
• With close to 500 dams and many near the end of their life cycle, need to prioritize for targeted outreach and incentives.
• Promote cheaper alternatives, less red tape and more incentives for private landowners. (e.g. let accumulated sediments flush downstream where lower risks exist?)
• Revisit LRIA or other MNR programs responsible for regulating private dams.
SPECIES COMPETITION: Tactics
• Prevent and reduce competition from invasive species, non-native Brown and Rainbow Trout, Atlantic Salmon and hatchery Brook Trout.
• Remove Special Regulations and allow harvesting of Brown and Rainbow Trout?
• Continue monitoring, set targets and triggers to control competitive species.
OTHER ISSUES: Tactics
• Data gaps and research vs. action!• Valuation of Ecological Goods and Services of
Brook Trout / habitat.• Cumulative Impact Assessments of all
preceding issues at each site?• Broaden scope to Southern Ontario to gain
partners and support.
Next Steps• Comments on these Issues, Strategies and
Tactics requested from all invitees (due in late November).
• Final document to include a status report and final, prioritized Strategies and Tactics list.
• Also includes timelines for completion and identifies lead and support roles.
• Anticipated completion by Spring 2013