Atlantic SalmonEgg Incubation Experiment

2008

Ontario Streams Technical Report No. 2009-01

Christine PritchardProject Biologist,Ontario Streams

January 8th, 2009

Table of Contents

Introduction…………………….……………………………………………………………………..….1

Site Locations and Selection..…………………………………………………………..…………….1

Methods…………………………………………………………………………………….…………….4Direct deposit into gravel………..…………………………………………….………..……4Scotty boxes with and without screens, in-gravel incubation..…….….…………...…5Whitlock-Vibert box, in-gravel incubation ……………………….……………………….6Whitlock-Vibert box hatchery tank incubation ……………….….………..…………….7Direct deposit into current ………………………………………….…………………….….8Scotty boxes with screens, above gravel incubation.....………………………..……...8

Results……………………………………………………………………………………………….….…9

Discussion………………………………………………………………………………………………..11

Conclusion…..………………………………………………………………………………………….12

AppendicesAppendix A: Spring 2008 Egg Incubation Experiment Observations of

Tested Incubation Methods at Coffey Creek Sites ….……………………..…13Appendix B: May 2008 Scotty Box Atlantic Salmon Egg Survival Results……...…..15Appendix C: May 2008 Whitlock-Vibert Box Atlantic

Salmon Survival Results ................ .............................................. ...................…16Appendix D: Wetted Width of Electrofished Sites …………………….…………….…16Appendix E: Site Photographs of 2008 Atlantic Salmon Egg

Incubation and Monitoring Process …………………………………………..…18Appendix F: Fish Collection Records for Sites 1-7 Showing

August/September Electrofishing Results .……………………………………...30

List of Figures

Figure 1a: Location of Coffey Creek 2008 Atlantic Salmon Egg Incubation Sites ………..2Figure 1b: Coffey Creek Farm Site Close-up ……………………………………………………..2Figure 1c: Fimes and Stewart Property Site Close-ups ………………………………………….2Figure 2: Rogers Creek Atlantic Salmon 2008 Egg Incubation Site Location ………………3

List of Tables

Table 1: Survival Rates of Atlantic Salmon Eggs per Tested Method ………………………10

1

Introduction

Atlantic salmon have been extirpated from Lake Ontario waters for over 100 years and likely from the Humber River headwaters for over 150 years. With the help of current restoration efforts mitigating barriers and reopening access to headwater tributaries for river spawning species like salmon, reintroduction to watersheds like the Humber River is possible.

With efforts already well underway in the Credit River, Duffins Creek and Cobourg Creek, many lessons have been learned when it comes to raising and stocking hatchery raised fish. Unfortunately with hatchery raised fish come s expense with care and feeding. In addition, there are instances where observed behavioural changes occur in the fish produced.

The practice of incubating Atlantic salmon eyed-eggs directly in headwater creeks, whereby viable fingerlings are produced, could be a tool in future reintroduction efforts, both in the Humber and other watersheds if a successful method can be proven.

In 2008, five eyed-egg incubation methods were tested within Coffey Creek, a headwater tributary of the upper Humber River watershed. In addition, one method was tested in Rogers Creek, a headwater tributary of the Credit River.

Site Locations and Selection

Coffey Creek, a headwater tributary of the Upper Humber, was chosen as the main location of this egg incubation experiment. This creek displays the relatively clean, coldwater habitat necessary for Atlantic salmon spawning. High gradient, fast flowing currents over cobble substrate can be found in several locations in the upper end of this watercourse. Atlantic salmon juveniles have been absent from this tributary for over 150 years. Figure 1 shows the locations of the selected sites. Sites were chosen based upon:

1. A fast flowing current and cobble substrate were present with minimal silt build up. It was noted that stream reaches immediately downstream of a road crossing tended to have a significant amount of silt accumulation over the natural cobble and gravel substrate due to runoff from the dirt road.

2. There existed an established relationship with the site’s landowner and there was no reasonable risk of the property ownership changing during the course of the experiment. This would guarantee us access for follow-up monitoring activities essential to the project. The property to the south-east of Innis Lake Road and Finnerty Sideroad was up for sale at the time of site selection and therefore no attempt was made to approach this landowner.

3. The site had evidence of groundwater discharge within the reach. This removed the concern for anchor ice formation.

As a result, Coffey Creek Farm, Fimes property, and the Stewart property by-pass channel were chosen as site locations. The Stewart property by-pass channel was specifically selected for the “direct deposit into current” method because the channel has large cobble able to catch eggs

2

Figure 1a: Location of Coffey Creek Atlantic Salmon Eyed-Egg Incubation Sites

Figure 1b: Coffey Creek Farm Site Close-up Figure 1c: Fimes and Stewart Property Site Close-ups

3

Figure 2: Rogers Creek 2008 Atlantic Salmon Eyed-Egg Incubation Site Location

4

poured into the current, however, the channel is also man-made and not deep (underlain with filter fabric). As a result we could not dig shallow pits at this site that would be necessary to implement the other methods. One site was chosen within the Credit River watershed shown in Figure 2. This site was the Stone Pond by-pass channel on Rogers Creek. This site also fit the habitat criteria listed above.

Methods

Five separate methods of Atlantic salmon eyed-egg incubation were tested in Coffey Cre ek, a cold headwater tributary of the Upper Humber; and one method was tested in Rogers Creek in the Credit River watershed in 2008.

The incubation methods tested were:

1. Scotty boxes with screens, in-gravel incubation (Fimes property) 2. Scotty boxes without screens, in-gravel incubation (Fimes property) 3. Whitlock-Vibert boxes (Coffey Creek Farm and Islington Sportsmen’s Club hatchery) 4. Direct deposit of eggs into gravel (Fimes property) 5. Direct deposit of eggs into current (Stewart property by-pass channel) 6. Scotty boxes with screens, above gravel incubation (Roger’s Creek Stone Pond Bypass

Channel)

In each case, the Atlantic salmon eyed-eggs were obtained from the Harwood Fish Culture Station near Port Hope, Ontario. The eyed-eggs were then established at sites and monitored as follows:

Direct deposit into gravel

Water temp: 0C Air Temp: 10C Date: January 23, 2008 On January 23, 2008 we walked the stretch of Coffey Creek flowing through the Fimes Property and located open riffles with no ice cover or evidence of anchor ice formation. Due to the cold temperatures already experienced that winter, we were confident that these areas would not freeze solid. We selected two of these riffles within 10m of one another. We broke up any thin ice that had formed at the edges of the stream banks to make the openings larger. We scooped up buckets of water from the stream and poured the buckets of water back over the area. The force of the water helped to break up the rocks and silt over the nest site. We then raked the disturbed sediment to the side to create a cleared pit similar to what an adult salmon would create during natural spawning activities. The pit was approximately 0.25m deep, 1.5m long and 0.5m wide. The l arge rocks that had been cleared from the pit were then piled at the downstream end of the pit to slow the flow. Mid-sized rocks (1/2” to 6” in diameter) were placed over the bottom of the pit to create a rough surface that would catch the eggs. A plastic container of 1000 Atlantic salmon eggs was then slowly poured over top of the pit, starting at the upstream end of the pit. Lastly, the remaining rocks that were cleared to the side were then gently raked back over the pit. This site was subsequently referred to as Site 1 and was located approximate ly 200m upstream of Innis Lake Road.

5

This process was repeated at Site 2 with another 1000 eggs, located approximately 5m upstream. The pit at Site 2 was approximately 0.2m deep, 0.75m long and 0.5m wide. Both sites were marked by labeling flagging tape and tying it in overhead trees. Ontario Streams’ staff returned to each site approximately once every two weeks until May 15th, 2008. During each visit visual observations were made concerning silt accumulation; rock movement; ice and snow cover. During the May site visits, attempts were made to spot any Atlantic salmon fry in the vicinity of the incubation sites. Photographs of each site were taken during each visit to document conditions.

On August 28th, 2008 Sites 1 and 2 were electrofished to determine the presence of Atlantic salmon fingerlings. A 50m survey was conducted, with the 25m point being situated half-way between Sites 1 and 2. A backpack electrofisher and 2 netters were used to sample the location. Upon completion of the electrofishing survey, the fish caught were identified according to species; their total length and weight were measured. The fish were then released back into the stream. In addition, the wetted width of the stream was measured using a measuring tape at 10 locations (approximately 4-5m apart) within the sampled reach. This information was then used to determine the number of Atlantic salmon fingerlings per m2.

Scotty boxes with and without screens, in-gravel incubation

Water temp: 1C Air Temp: 10C Date: January 23, 2008 On January 23, 2008 it was observed that the upstream reach of the creek flowing through the Fimes property was completely free of ice and snow, indicating a high amount of groundwater input. Two sites were chosen approximately 75m and 100m, respectively, downstream from Finnerty Sideroad where sediment was not obscuring the cobble stream bottom. As with Sites 1 and 2, we scooped up buckets of water from the stream and poured the buckets of water back over Sites 3 and 4, so that the force of the water would break up the rocks and silt over the nest sites. The disturbed rocks and silt were then raked to the side to create a cleared pit approximately 8 inches deep. Four Scotty boxes per site were placed in each pit. They were positioned so that they were standing on end, with the tops of the boxes sitting just below the stream bottom. Large rocks that had been cleared from the pit were then repositioned around the boxes to hold them in place. Large and medium rocks (approximately 2”-6” diameter) were used to fill in the pit and cover the tops of the Scotty boxes. The large/medium rocks were specifically used so that the current would be able to flow through the pit area and the boxes themselves. While both sites were located within fast flowing riffles, it was noted that at Site 3 the boxes were positioned at the crest of the riffle, where as Site 4’s boxes were positioned at the bottom end of the riffle because the riffle substrate was quite calcified in that area, making it hard to excavate . Of the Scotty boxes at Site 3, 2 had screens and 2 did not. Site 4 had 3 boxes with screens and one without. Each box held 200 Atlantic salmon eggs, with a total of 800 eggs per site .

6

Ontario Streams’ staff returned to each site approximately once every two weeks until May 15th, 2008. During each visit visual observations were made concerning silt accumulation; rock movement; ice and snow cover. During the May site visits, attempts were made to spot any Atlantic salmon fry in the vicinity of the incubation sites. Photographs of each site were taken on each visit to document conditions. On May 20th 2008, the Scotty boxes were removed from the stream and checked for egg survival. The rocks over top of each site were removed by hand. Each Scotty box was pulled out one at a time. It was noted if the Scotty box was screened or not. A photograph of the outside of the box was taken to document silt accumulation. The bolts holding the boxes closed were unscrewed and the box was opened over top of a water-filled bin. A second photograph was taken of the opened box, again to document silt accumulation. The number of live Atlantic salmon fry; and the dead, but developed fry were counted and tallied. The living fry were placed in a bucket of water while the above process was completed for each Scotty box at Sites 3 and 4. After all of the boxes were removed and fry were tallied, the living fry were released into the stream. Ontario Streams’ staff walked in an upstream direction, gently pouring out the fry in sheltered areas (i.e. behind woody debris or large rocks) in the reach between Sites 3 and 4.

On August 28th, 2008 Sites 3 and 4 were electrofished to determine the presence of Atlantic salmon fingerlings. A 50m survey was conducted, with the 25m point being situated half-way between Sites 3 and 4. A backpack electrofisher and 2 netters were used to sample the location. Upon completion of the electrofishing survey, the caught fish were identified according to species; their total length and weight were measured. The fish were then released back into the stream. In addition, the wetted width of the stream was measured using a measuring tape at 10 locations (approximately 4-5m apart) within the sampled reach. This information was then used to determine the number of Atlantic salmon fingerlings per m2.

Whitlock-Vibert boxes, in-gravel incubation Water Temperature: 0C Air Temperature: -11’C Date: January 20, 2008 On January 20, 2008 volunteers from the Islington Sportsmen Club helped MNR and Ontario Streams staff install 8 Whitlock-Vibert boxes at 2 separate sites within Coffey Creek as it flows through Coffey Creek Farm. The tributary crossing Finnerty Sideroad, to the east of Gore Road was rejected as a potential site for reasons outlined in “Site Locations and Selection”. Two areas were found along the upstream section of the joining tributary that fit the site selection criteria. At Site 5, a pit was dug in the riffle area using a shovel and a rake. Two Whitlock-Vibert boxes were tied into a 5-sided wire cage and 200 Atlantic salmon eggs were deposited into each Whitlock-Vibert box. The wire cage was placed in the pit with the open side facing down and the top of the cage just below the stream bottom. A 12” metal spike was hammered through the wire cage and into the stream bed to hold the cage in place. Flagging tape was tied to the spike to help identify the incubation site. Rock and gravel were gently raked back over top of the boxes. Large rock was then piled overtop.

7

Two wire cages were installed at each site with a total of 800 eggs incubated at each. This process was repeated at Site 6, approximately 20m downstream with another 800 Atlantic salmon eggs. (An additional 200 eggs in a 9th Whitlock-Vibert box were held back. These eggs were incubated in a man-made gravel bed in the Islington Sportsmen’s Club hatchery.) Ontario Streams’ staff returned to each site approximately once every two weeks until May 15th, 2008. During each visit visual observations were made concerning silt accumulation; rock movement; ice and snow cover. During the May site visits, attempts were made to spot any Atlantic salmon fry in the vicinity of the incubation sites. Photographs of each site were taken on each visit to document conditions.

On May 20th 2008, the Whitlock-Vibert boxes were removed from the stream and checked for egg survival. The rock over top of each site was removed by hand. Each wire cage was pulled out one at a time. The second Whitlock-Vibert box in each cage was stored in a bucket of water while the first box was examined. The Whitlock-Vibert box was gently opened and a photograph was taken documenting the amount of silt buildup. Each box was filled with a dense ball of sediment. Each box was emptied into a small aquarium net and rinsed by placing it in the stream and allowing the current to wash through. The dead eggs, seen as small, white, soft balls and larger sediment remained. This material was carefully sorted through by hand and each dead egg was tallied. Larger clumps of dead eggs were estimated based on their size. The total number of dead eggs was subtracted from 200 (the total number of eggs in each Whitlock-Vibert box) and this was the number of eggs assumed to have hatched and escaped into the stream.

On September 2nd, 2008 Sites 5 and 6 were electrofished to determine the presence of Atlantic salmon fingerlings. A 50m survey was conducted, with the 25m point being situated half-way between Sites 5 and 6. A backpack electrofisher and 2 netters were used to sample the location. Upon completion of the electrofishing survey, the caught fish were identified according to species; their total length and weight were measured. The fish were then released back into the stream. In addition, the wetted width of the stream was measured using a measuring tape at 10 locations (approximately 4-5m apart) within the sampled reach. This information was then used to determine the number of Atlantic salmon fingerlings per m2.

Whitlock-Vibert box hatchery tank incubation

Water temp: 8-10C Air Temp: N/A Date: January 20, 2008 In addition to the in-stream Whitlock-Vibert box experiment, one Whitlock-Vibert box containing 200 Atlantic salmon eggs were incubated at the Islington Sportsmen’s Club hatchery also starting on January 20th, 2008. Spring water is piped into the hatchery and overflows into a large tank. The Whitlock-Vibert box was buried in a clean gravel bed where the incoming spring water would up-well through the setup before flowing into the tank. This set up simulated a natural upwelling in a gravel bar that might be found in a stream. The upwelling spring water was intended to keep the eggs clean of suspended sediment during the incubation period. The spring water temperature remained steady between 8 and 10C during the entire process.

8

Observations were made throughout the spring by Brian Vickery of the Islington Sportsmen’s Club. Occasionally the surface of the gravel was swept to watch for development. Any fry that hatched eventually dropped down into the holding tank. Feeders were set up in the tank and a floating 0.5 feed was spread every hour. Any dead fry that were found floating in the tank were regularly removed.

Direct deposit into current

Water temp: 0C Air Temp: N/A Date: January 24, 2008 On January 24, 2008, 2000 Atlantic salmon eggs were stocked into the Stewart property by-pass channel on Coffey Creek. On this date the stream was frozen throughout the length of the by-pass channel and downstream area, however flowing water could be heard underneath the thin ice. Therefore, 5 holes were chopped in the ice at the upstream end of the by-pass channel and 3 more holes were chopped below the steep section of the by-pass channel. Each hole was approx 2ft long by 1 ft wide. A total of 2000 eggs were gently poured from a plastic container into the current. The eggs were approximately dispersed equally between the upper and lower portions of the by-pass channel. The current carried the eggs and they deposited between the spaces amongst the larger rocks. Ontario Streams’ staff returned to the site approximately once every two weeks until May 15th, 2008. During each visit visual observations were made concerning silt accumulation; rock movement; ice and snow cover. During the May site visits, attempts were made to spot any Atlantic salmon fry in the vicinity of the incubation sites. Photographs of each site were taken on each visit to document conditions.

On August 28th, 2008 the Stewart property by-pass channel was electrofished to determine the presence of Atlantic salmon fingerlings. A 62m survey (the length of the channel) was conducted, starting at the bottom end of the channel and ending at the pool below the access road culvert. A backpack electrofisher and 2 netters were used to sample the location. Upon completion of the electrofishing survey, the caught fish were identified according to species; their total length and weight were measured. The fish were then released back into the stream. In addition, the wetted width of the stream was measured using a measuring tape at 10 locations (approximately 4-5m apart) within the sampled reach. This information was then used to determine the number of Atlantic salmon fingerlings per m2.

Scotty boxes with screens, above gravel incubation

Water temp: N/A Air Temp: 10C Date: January 23, 2008 Three screened Scotty incubators were positioned in Roger’s Creek within the Stone Pond by-pass channel. Two of the Scotty boxes were placed at opposite edges of the channel on the upstream side of a rock vortex weir within the by-pass channel. Because the by-pass channel was man-made, we did not excavate into the stream bottom to position the Scotty boxes as we did at Sites 3 and 4 in Coffey Creek.

9

Instead the boxes were positioned so that they were submerged, with the flat surface of the box facing perpendicular to the current. Large rock was piled overtop of the Scotty boxes to hold them in place. The third Scotty box was positioned in the same way at the edge of the channel directly upstream of a cedar sweep. Two hundred Atlantic salmon eggs were contained in each box.

The Scotty boxes were monitored periodically by MNR staff throughout the spring to ensure that they remained in place. In May 2008 the Scotty boxes were retrieved from the channel and opened. The fry in each box were counted, tallied and then released into the creek.

Results

Notable observations made at Sites 1 and 2 during the incubation period included the fact that neither of the sites experienced full ice cover or significant anchor ice formation. Deer tracks indicated that deer did tramp through the stream through the egg incubation sites and could have caused disturbance of the developing eggs, however over the course of the spring there was no notable silt accumulation overtop of the man-made redds. The August electrofishing survey found that Sites 1 and 2 with the Direct Deposit into Gravel method had the highest observed density of fingerlings. The number of fry/m2 was 0.08 fingerlings/m2 (Table 1). During the spring observation period there was some concern over silt accumulation at Site 3. There was likely silt buildup between the spaces in the rocks surrounding the Scotty boxes, but no significant accumulation overtop. Deer tracks crossing at Sites 3 and 4 were also noted, and some rock movement took place, either due to disturbance caused by the deer or strong current during snow melt and precipitation events. On March 31st and April 28th 2008 when runoff was flowing off of Finnerty Sideroad, the stream itself was noted to be quite turbid. Specifically on April 28th, 2008 the water was so turbid that the stream bottom could not be viewed. The boxes were pulled from the stream and opened on May 20th, 2008. A visual comparison of the screened and unscreened boxes did not show a notable difference in the amount of sediment inside the Scotty boxes. Between Sites 3 and 4, 21 living fry were released from the Scotty boxes in May, with 20 coming from the screened boxes (Appendix B). The percent survival of fry i n May from the screened Scotty boxes was 2.0% (Table 1). A similar percent survival could not be calculated for the unscreened boxes as some of the developing fry could have escaped from the box prior to their opening in May. The August electrofishing survey at Sites 3 and 4 caught 6 Atlantic salmon fingerlings. It was calculated that the combination of Scotty boxes with and without screens at Sites 3 and 4 produced a density of 0.06 fingerlings/m2 (Table 1). This was the second highest density of the five field tested methods in Coffey Creek. The screened Scotty boxes incubated within Roger’s Creek in the Credit River watershed produced the highest observed spring survival rate. A total of 294 living fry were released from the screened boxes in May 2008 (Appendix B). This was a 49.0% survival rate based on the 600 eggs originally incubated (Table 1). Sites 5 and 6 remained clear of ice cover during the spring observation period. It also did not appear that the areas over top of the Whitlock-Vibert boxes were experiencing notable sediment accumulation due to a strong current. Plumes of silt did form downstream and to the sides of the sites. April 28th was the only observed date where the stream appeared turbid. However, when the boxes were removed from the stream and opened on May 20th, 2008 the boxes were packed full of silt, sand and small gravel.

10

Mouldy, white eggs were found in all but one Whitlock-Vibert box. At this time, 2 living Atlantic salmon fry were also found and released from the boxes. Assuming all eggs that were not found in the Whitlock-Vibert boxes in May hatched, a very promising 92.6% survival of fry occurred with this method (Appendix C). The September electrofishing monitoring found 2 surviving fingerlings, which was the third highest density of 0.01 fry/m2 (Table 1). The 200 eggs incubated in the Whitlock-Vibert box at the Islington Sportsmen’s Club hatchery were believed to have a 100% hatching success rate as no dead fry or mouldy eggs were found when the Whitlock-Vibert box was removed in May. During the month of February, hatched salmon were visually observed swimming in and out of the gravel. In time the fry floated down to the holding tank. At this stage the Atlantic salmon appeared to be fully developed fry, however no fry were seen rising to the surface of the tank to feed. All of the hatched fry subsequently died in a matter of days of being in the holding tank. Site 7 experienced varying amounts of snow and ice cover throughout the spring observation period, however ice cover always appeared to be thin and running water could be heard underneath. The current in the channel was quite strong, especially during the spring melt. During the August electrofishing survey, no fry were found within the Direct Deposit into Current location. Table 1: Survival Rates of Atlantic Salmon Eggs Per Tested Method

Site Method # Eyed-Eggs

Stocked

% Survival of Stocked Eyed-

Eggs In May 2008

Length of Electrofished

Reach

Average Wetted Width of

Electrofished Reach

Fingerlings/m2

In August/September

2008 Site 1 and 2 Direct deposit

into gravel 2000 N/A 50m 2.59m 0.08

Site 3 and 4 Scotty boxes with and without screens, in-gravel incubation

1600 N/A (unscreened boxes)

50m 2.10m 0.06

2.0% (screened boxes)

Roger’s Creek

Scotty boxes with screens, above gravel incubation

600 49.0% N/A N/A N/A

Site 5 and 6 Whitlock-Vibert Boxes in-gravel incubation

1600 N/A 50m 3.32m 0.01

Islington Sportsmen Club

Whitlock-Vibert box hatchery tank incubation

200 100% followed by 100% mortality due to lack of feeding

N/A N/A N/A

Site 7 Direct deposit into current

2000 N/A 62m 1.24m 0.0

11

Discussion

When comparing the screened Scotty boxes tested in this experiment, those incubated in Roger’s Creek appeared to have the highest percentage of survival by a wide margin (2.0% in Coffey Creek versus 49.0% in Rogers Creek; Table 1). It is proposed that the differences between site conditions (i.e. amount of sediment entering the stream in runoff) and placement of the Scotty boxes (i.e. above the stream bottom versus excavated pit) in Roger’s Creek versus Sites 3 and 4 in Coffey Creek caused the large discrepancy in survival rates found with this method. An electrofishing survey in the fall of 2008 did not occur in Rogers Creek and therefore a direct comparison of fingerlings/m2 cannot be made for the two methods of Scotty box placement. However, the electrofishing surveys completed within the Coffey Creek watershed found the combination of screened and unscreened Scotty boxes produced a 0.06 fingerling/m2 density at Sites 3 and 4 (See Table 1). This density was the second highest observed in the Coffey Creek sites, behind 0.08 at Sites 1 and 2 (Direct Deposit into Gravel).

The Whitlock-Vibert box in-gravel incubation appeared to produce the highest observed percent survival of fry in May, however several assumptions went into this calculation. It was assumed that each white, circular mass found within the boxes upon opening represented one dead egg. It was also assumed that all of the dead eggs were still visible in this way by the May opening date and that they had not decomposed past the point of detection. In comparison, the screened Scotty boxes, which would not have allowed the premature release of any fry, did not have one visible unhatched egg apparent per deceased individual in the Scotty boxes. The 0.01 fingerling/m2 density that was calculated based on the September electrofishing monitoring for the Whitlock-Vibert box in-gravel incubation method was the third highest observed in the Coffey Creek sites. Therefore, the best case scenario is that the high May survival rate was correct and the hatched fry dispersed further up and downstream of the electrofished monitoring site, thus resulting in the lower fingerling density. The worst case scenario would be that the two living fry that were found within the boxes when they were opened in May were the only surviving fry out of the original 1600 eyed- eggs stocked through this method; and that the two Atlantic salmon fingerlings sampled on September 2, 2008 where these same two individuals. More in-depth follow up monitoring needs to be completed for the Whitlock-Vibert box in-gravel incubation method before any of these assumptions can be fully justified.

Visual observation indicated that both the Scotty boxes and Whitlock-Vibert boxes in Coffey Creek experienced difficulties due to sediment buildup within the boxes themselves. It appeared that many eggs were lost due to suffocation by silt before they had the opportunity to hatch. As sediment entering the streams from surrounding gravel roads is a well known and long-term problem in Coffey Creek, Scotty and Whitlock-Vibert boxes may not be appropriate for implementation in this area. Further experimentation with incubator placement may help to eliminate or avoid sediment buildup within the equipment. A balance between maximizing the amount of flow through the incubators, while maintaining adequate protection for the developing eggs, needs to be found.

The Whitlock-Vibert boxes themselves are obviously successful when employed under the right conditions. The estimated 100% hatching success rate at the Islington Sportsmen’s Club hatchery showed that without the problematic sediment buildup, this method does work. Unfortunately, once the eggs hatched, the fry did not appear to feed and they eventually all died. It is suspected that low water temperature discouraged the fry from feeding. As the hatchery is spring fed, future efforts should be made to alter the water temperature within the hatchery, or stock the fry in a local stream shortly after hatching. If this problem can be overcome, the incubation of Atlantic salmon eggs at this hatchery

12

could become a useful tool in the reestablishment of Atlantic salmon in the Humber watershed as the hatchery is already set up; run by volunteers; and is closely located to the stocking sites.

The Direct Deposit into Gravel method appeared to work the best out of the Coffey Creek tested sites. It had the highest density of fingerlings during the August monitoring. It is interesting to note that this method most closely mimics the natural egg laying process of an Atlantic salmon. This method should be tested at multiple locations in the future to ensure that its success over the other methods was not site specific. The method itself is also advantageous because it does not require specialized equipment, such as with the Scotty and Whitlock-Vibert boxes.

The Direct Deposit into Current method did not appear to work at all. In addition to the August electrofishing survey that was conducted as part of this experiment that did not find any surviving fingerlings within the by-pass channel; Ontario Streams’ conducted a 100m presence/absence electrofishing survey directly below the by-pass channel , as well as upstream of the channel, as part of routine monitoring for another project. Neither of these other surveys founds any Atlantic salmon. The failure of this method may be due to the fact that Site 7 experiences strong flows and a very high gradient throughout the by-pass channel. There is also a lot of large rock with little gravel filling the spaces in between, therefore much of the stream flow goes under the rock layer instead of above. This fact made intensive electrofishing and effective netting within the by-pass channel very difficult. Habitat enhancement of the by-pass channel is planned for 2009. Rock will be added and moved. Gravel will also be added. The end result should produce a more natural stream bottom that may be appropriate for future egg stocking attempts and monitoring efforts.

Conclusion

This Atlantic salmon incubation experiment indicated that while not all methods proved effective, the practice of incubating Atlantic salmon eyed-eggs directly in headwater creeks shows promi se as a tool in future reintroduction efforts in the Humber watershed. It is recommended that a second phase of this experiment be continued in 2009. The Direct Deposit into Gravel and the Scotty boxes (above gravel placement method) in particular should be tested further in the Coffey Creek watershed. Multiple incubation sites between the headwaters of Coffey Creek and its confluence with the Main Humber River should be chosen to compare survival and growth rates, reusing the 2008 test sites for these methods as “control” sites. In addition, incubation of eyed eggs should continue at the Islington Sportsmen’s Club hatchery, with efforts made to alter the water temperature within the holding tanks to conditions appropriate for the produced fry. With continued adaptation to the lessons learned, fingerling survival should increase and the developed methods can be positively incorporated into the Atlantic salmon reintroduction plan for not only the Humber, but other watersheds as well.

13

Appendix A: Spring 2008 Egg Incubation Experiment Observations of Tested Incubation Methods at Coffey Creek Sites

Date Coffey Creek Farm – Whitlock-Vibert Boxes in-gravel incubation

Fimes Property – Direct Deposit into Gravel Fimes Property – Scotty Boxes with and without Screens in-gravel incubation

Stewart Property By-Pass Channel; Direct Deposit in Current Upstream Site Downstream Site Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4

Feb 4 Clear of silt buildup on rock and u/s of rock pile; Water flowing around sides of rock pile and dark, oblong, silt plume formed directly d/s of site; Minor ice and snow formation on stakes but current flowing well over site; Flow strong as it flows under and up from u/s woody debris in channel

Rock pile also clear of silt; small amount of silt d/s of pile; water flowing mostly around to R of pile and scouring; Rock piled above water line therefore has some snow build up on top; Flow not as strong as u/s site, but channel completely clear of ice

More open than site 2; as with 2 there is some silt, rocks don’t stick out like they are freshly disturbed, but they are not being covered in silt

Some snow and ice cover at edges (thin; broke when I stepped there); Open areas don’t look silted over, but there is a little bit cuz they don’t stick out and appear freshly disturbed

Same as 4 ; open channel, some snow on rocks; doesn’t look “fresh”, but only small amount of silt; water pours down into “pool” above site, shallow after site

Channel clear of ice, snow; Little bit of snow on top of exposed rock; Small amount of silt on rock (doesn’t look freshly moved); Rock in place as it was left

Bottom section: flowing and open where holes were hacked; new snow covering 2, and 3 about 6inches deep Top section: snow covering all holes but they are not frozen over underneath; top pool at culvert is open Can’t see eggs amongst rocks in sections where holes are open

Feb 19 (melt and heavy rain Sunday previous)

-Riffle caused by u/s branches seems to be keeping rocks clear of silt -some deposition to sides and behind as current scours around rock pile -channel clear of snow and ice -rock appears unmoved

-rock mound seems to be staying clear of sediment – current riffles overtop -smaller gravel and sediment to right of rock pile, which is towards left side of stream -channel clear of ice and snow -rock appears unmoved

-same as site 2, but with more advanced ice formation around rocks; not as much patchy anchor ice on bottom -some silt build up – mostly u/s; current in riffle keeping pit reasonably clear, but would not be able to pick out pit if it weren’t marked

-channel is clear of ice and snow; normal flow; but looks like some patchy anchor ice may be forming on bottom -some silt coverage; rock pit does not stick out at all – would not be able to find it if it wasn’t marked -rock appears unmoved

-channel free of ice and snow; small amount of snow on top of rock -rock appears unmoved -some silt buildup in front of site as u/s pool is filling in slightly -pile itself seems to be clear based on overhead view

-channel free of ice and snow; strong run keeping site clear of silt -top of 1 box visible – moved rock to recover

-top pool frozen over; ice thin -most of channel flowing, free of ice cover with minimal formation on tops of some high rocks -steep section of channel covered in snow but hear water flowing underneath -can’t see eggs, but no significant silt buildup over rocks – good, strong flow -90% of stocking sites have open flow, no ice cover

Mar 3, 08 (rained this morning; warm day, everything is thawing; snow storm expected

-u/s and site itself are clear of sediment; fine sediment plume directly d/s of site -most of channel

-channel clear and flowing; small amount of ice on rocks above water at site -no sediment build up

-section open and flowing -bottom blends with surrounding area -no notable sediment buildup; expected amount of sediment amongs t

-Same as site 1 -sediment accumulating in small pool on u/s side; 2.5 to 3 inches deep now -rock remains unmoved -channel open and flowing (mostly around sides of

-channel completely open and flowing -rock unmoved -no sediment

-bottom end: mostly open; very thin patches of ice and snow remain -steep section: approx. 1ft of snow on top of thin ice cover; ice below

14

later in week) clear of snow and ice; only remains at edges and around fallen woody debris -air temp: 8C; water temp: 2C

apparent -rock unmoved -gravel more fine here than at u/s site

cobble -air temp: 9C; water temp: 2.5C

rock pile) -air temp: 9C; water temp: 3.5C

buildup noted becoming slushy and approx 1cm think…I sunk through in 4 places walking up channel -top end: top pool open; snow cover 6inches or less over channel with some small open patches; hear strong flow underneath -air temp: 8C; water temp: 2C

Mar 15, 2008 (light rain off an on)

-same -rocks clear of sediment, some snow covering woody debris u/s; clear of ice -air temp: 3C -forgot thermometer for water temp…

-same -rocks clear of sediment -channel open

-same; no ice; snow u/s on woody debris -deer crossing here (1 set of tracks) -small wood and twigs; no change in sediment observed -air temp: 1C -water temp: 2.5C

-same; some finer sand in small patches and in cracks between rocks at u/s end -thin amount of ice u/s of site; snow cover where there is woody debris in stream

-rock slightly moved -can see pink corner of Scotty box; fixed -u/s pool approx. 4-5inches deep -channel clear of ice; snow on woody debris but not covering channel -air temp: 1C -water temp: 3C

-multiple deer tracks crossing here -rock still covering site, moved slightly -channel completely open of ice and snow -no sediment buildup observed

-bottom half of by-pass channel 100% open -steep middle section covered by approx. 1ft deep of snow -top half 100% open -air temp: 3C -water temp: 2C

Mar 31, 2008 Light rain; fog

-water clear -channel open; snow covering u/s debris across channel -no sediment buildup on or u/s of site -rock unmoved -water temp 3.5C Air temp 4C

-water clear -channel open -no sediment buildup -rock unmoved

-channel clear of ice -no turbidity -rock unmoved; no notable sediment buildup -water temp: 3.5C -lost thermometer….

-deer tracks crossing here -no notable sediment buildup, just small amount in cracks as observed before -rock unmoved -water clear as opposed to sites 3 and 4 -channel free of ice

-water slightly turbid due to melt water -rock appears unmoved -u/s pool 4-5in deep -no silt buildup on pile or d/s -channel fully open and flowing

-fresh deer tracks crossing here -top edge of box visible – fixed it -water turbid, but no sediment buildup

-top and bottom ends clear of snow and ice -snow covering steep middle section – all snow (approx 1ft deep), no ice

April 28, 2008 Light rain; high flows

-high flow – rocks at site completely submerged, water slightly turbid; site looks clear of sediment -no snow or ice left -Air: 6.5C, Water

See u/s site Water turbid – can’t see bottom -water 6.6C

See Site 1 -water level high, very turbid (can make out tops of rocks, but not to the bottom -rock appears unmoved -water: 6.6C

See Site 4 -high flow; channel completely thawed; water slightly turbid -water: 6.6C

15

10.5C May 15, 2008 Sunny, clear; expected spring flows

-water clear; no sediment buildup on site -top of cage visible -looked for fry: saw none -Air: 13C; Water: 11C

-water clear; no notable sediment buildup on site -can see small edge of wire cage -looked for fry: saw none

-possible deer tracks on R bank -no change in sediment condition -looked for fry: 2 possible sightings 4m d/s -water: 9C

-possible deer tracks on R bank -no change in sediment condition -looked for fry: 2 possible sightings 2m d/s

-edges of 3 boxes visible, but main rock still covering -site itself appears unaffected by sediment -pool on u/s side of rock pile approx 4 inches deep; no longer concerned that it is filling in with sediment -looked for fry: saw none -Water temp 9.5C

-top edge of 1 box visible -rest of rock in place -no sediment deposition -looked for fry: saw none

-couldn’t see fry; very fast current -water: 10.5C

Appendix B: May 2008 Scotty Box Atlantic Salmon Egg Survival Results

Site Screen Present? Living Fry Developed but Deceased Fry Percentage of Living Fry in May 2008 (out of original 200 Incubated Eggs) Site 3, Coffey Creek Yes 7 1 3.5%

Yes 1 1 0.5% No 0 1 0.0% No 1 0 0.5%

Site 4, Coffey Creek Yes 6 1 3.0% Yes 6 2 3.0% Yes 0 0 0.0% No 0 1 0.0%

Rogers Creek Yes 119 0 59.5% Yes 130 0 65.0% Yes 45 0 22.5%

16

Appendix C: May 2008 Whitlock-Vibert Box In-Gravel Incubation Atlantic Salmon Survival Results

Site Living Fry Released from Whitlock-Vibert Box * Estimated Dead Eggs ** Estimated % Survival *** Site 5 0 3 98.5

2 11 94.5 0 3 98.5 0 80 60.0

Site 6 0 17 91.5 0 1 99.5 0 0 100 0 3 98.5

*200 Atlantic salmon eggs per box; assumed that unaccounted for fry hatched and escaped into the creek. ** white, mouldy, decomposing eggs were found among the sediment upon opening of Whitlock -Vibert Boxes. Each white ball was counted as 1 dead egg. ***Based on May release date. Appendix D: Wetted Width of Electrofished Sites Site Transect

# Transect Wetted Width (m)

Average Wetted Width of 50m Reach (m)

Estimated Area of 50m Electrofished Reach

Sites 1 and 2: Direct Deposit into Gravel Method 1 2.05 2.59 129.5m2 2 2.43 3 2.98 4 4.53 5 2.60 6 1.96 7 1.74 8 2.11 9 3.63 10 1.89

Sites 3 and 4: Scotty Boxes With and Without Screens, In-Gravel Incubation

1 1.63 2.10 105m2 2 2.10 3 1.96 4 1.70 5 2.84 6 2.48 7 2.64

17

8 1.95 9 1.65 10 2.08

Sites 5 and 6: Whitlock-Vibert Boxes, In-Gravel Incubation

1 3.55 3.32 166m2 2 3.09 3 2.74 4 2.86 5 2.67 6 4.56 7 3.83 8 3.25 9 3.53 10 3.08

Site 7: Direct Deposit into Current 1 1.00 1.25 77.5m2

**62m Reach 2 0.75 3 0.81 4 0.97 5 1.29 6 0.96 7 0.75 8 1.55 9 1.60 10 2.77

Direct Deposit into Gravel: Sites 1 and 2, Fimes Property

A pit was excavated in a cobble riffle by breaking up the substrate with buckets of water, and thenraking the disturbed sediment to the side.

Medium sized rock was then placed atthe downstream end of the pit to slowflow, as well as within the pit to createa course surface that would catchthe deposited eggs.

Atlantic salmon eggs were slowly pouredinto the pit.

Rock and gravel were gently raked backover the site.

Sizing of finished direct deposit pit

default

Text Box

21

Sediment buildup outside and insidescreened Scotty boxes when removedin May.

Sediment buildup outside and insideunscreened Scotty boxes when removedin May.

Whitlock-Vibert Boxes: Sites 5 and 6, Coffey Creek Farm

Installation of Whitlock-Vibert boxes: a holeis first dug....

...then the Vibert boxes are placed in thewire cage, submerged and staked down...

...Finally, the rock and gravel are rakedback over the site.

Removal of Whitlock-Vibert boxes inMay 2008; significant sediment build upwas found within boxes.

Atlantic salmon fryfound in Vibert box.

Mouldy eggs foundin sediment ofVibert box.

Direct Deposit into Current: Site 7, Stewart Property By-pass Channel

Snow and ice coverage of by-passchannel at time of egg stocking.

Example of holes chopped in ice foregg deposition.

Approximate size of stocking holes.

Scotty Boxes with Screens: Roger’s Creek

Positioning of the three Scotty boxes within the Stonepond by-pass channel on Roger’s Creek; one box waslocated above the stream bottom, downstream of acedar sweep, while the other two boxes were placed atthe stream edge on the upstream side of a rock vortex weir

Scotty box in May, showing sedimentaccumulation on the outside ....

Hatched fry released from a Scotty boxin May 2008.

....and inside of the incubator.

Licence to Collect Fish for Scientific PurposesField Collection Record

Licence No: 1046210 Licencee Name: Doug ForderBusiness Name: Ontario Streams Telephone: 905-713-

7399Fax: 905-713-7361

Mailing Address: 50 Bloomington Rd W. Town/City: Aurora Postal Code: L4G 3G8Waterbody Name: Coffey Creek Township/Municipality: CaledonGeneral Description of Sampling Site Location/Access:17888 Innis Lake Rd – Sites 1 and 2 u/s of Innis Lake Rd on Mrs. Fimes Property

Collection Site No. 1 of 4 Site UTM Coordinates: E NCollection Date: 08/28/08 Start Time: 9:15 End Time: 10:15 Duration (hrs) 0.5Electrofisher Seconds: 868 Length of Station (m) 50 Water Temp. (C)

11.9Air Temp. (C) 16.8

Stream Type: Intermittent X Permanent Watercress Present: Yes X NoWaterbody Type: Spring Canal X Stream/River River/Lake Junction Flooded Area

Pool Pond Lake Reservoir Muskeg/BogOther (Describe)____________________________________________________Rock 35 Boulder 5 Rubble Gravel 40 Sand 20Silt Clay Muck Marl Detritus

Bottom Type byPercent:(Total = 100%) Other (Description)Current: Still X Slow X Medium Fast Quantitative (m/s) _______________Water Colour/Clarity: X Colourless Yellow/Brown Blue/Green Turbid

Other __________________ Secchi Depth: (m) _________________Aquatic Vegetation: Submergent Floating Emergent X NoneCover (Shore): None X Sparse Moderate Dense Other ______________________Cover (In Water): None Sparse X Moderate Dense Other ______________________Gear: Seine Gill Net Dip Net Angled Trawl Minnow Trap Piscicide

Trap Net X Electrofisher Surber Other _____________________________________

Mesh Size (cm)Size of Net (Gill or Seine Net)Length (m):

Size of Net or Mouth(Trap, Hoop or Trawl) (m): Smallest: Largest:

Selectivity of Sample: All Kept X None Kept* Some Kept* No Catch* Record released fish on back.

Date: Day 28 Month 08 Year 2008Collectors: C. Pritchard, M. Heaton, E. Funnell

Additional Data: (Pollution, Condition of Fish, Habitat Conditions)

-3 salmon fingerlings died

MNR Office Use:Watershed: _________________________Waterbody Name: ___________________Fish Dot No.: ___________

Continued on Reverse

Species Captured

Species Code No.Caught

No. Kept Size Range(T.L. in mm)

Atlantic Salmon Fingerlings 077 1 3 67077 1 2 63077 1 2 61077 1 2 58077 1 2 62077 1 1 55077 1 1 52077 1 2 61077 1 3 64077 1 3 63

Brook Trout 080 1 49 170080 1 28 147080 1 23 134080 1 19 129080 1 17 116080 1 7 108080 1 9 99080 1 8 95080 1 3 72

Brook Trout YOY 080 1 12 188Brook Trout YOY 080 12 40 60-78Identified By: M. Heaton Date: 08/28/08

Station Diagram(Include a map that illustrates clearly, at an appropriate scale, the location of each collection site and a diagram that illustratesthe features of that site. Sites where no specimens were caught must also be included.

Finnerty Sdrd N

* Sites marked with pink flagging tape

InnisL

akeR

d

50m

Licence to Collect Fish for Scientific PurposesField Collection Record

Licence No: 1046210 Licencee Name: Doug ForderBusiness Name: Ontario Streams Telephone: 905-713-

7399Fax: 905-713-7361

Mailing Address: 50 Bloomington Rd W. Town/City: Aurora Postal Code: L4G 3G8Waterbody Name: Coffey Creek Township/Municipality: CaledonGeneral Description of Sampling Site Location/Access:17888 Innis Lake Rd – Sites 3 and 4 on Mrs. Fimes Property, downstream of Finnerty Sdrd

Collection Site No. 2 of 4 Site UTM Coordinates: E NCollection Date: 08/28/08 Start Time: 12:05 End Time: 12:25 Duration (hrs) 0.33Electrofisher Seconds: 456 Length of Station (m) 50 Water Temp. (C)

12.3Air Temp. (C) 18.6

Stream Type: Intermittent X Permanent Watercress Present: Yes X NoWaterbody Type: Spring Canal X Stream/River River/Lake Junction Flooded Area

Pool Pond Lake Reservoir Muskeg/BogOther (Describe)____________________________________________________Rock 35 Boulder 5 Rubble Gravel 25 Sand 25Silt Clay 10 Muck Marl Detritus

Bottom Type byPercent:(Total = 100%) Other (Description)Current: Still X Slow X Medium Fast Quantitative (m/s) _______________Water Colour/Clarity: X Colourless Yellow/Brown Blue/Green Turbid

Other __________________ Secchi Depth: (m) _________________Aquatic Vegetation: Submergent Floating Emergent X NoneCover (Shore): None X Sparse Moderate Dense Other ______________________Cover (In Water): None Sparse X Moderate Dense Other ______________________Gear: Seine Gill Net Dip Net Angled Trawl Minnow Trap Piscicide

Trap Net X Electrofisher Surber Other _____________________________________

Mesh Size (cm)Size of Net (Gill or Seine Net)Length (m):

Size of Net or Mouth(Trap, Hoop or Trawl) (m): Smallest: Largest:

Selectivity of Sample: All Kept X None Kept* Some Kept* No Catch* Record released fish on back.

Date: Day 28 Month 08 Year 2008Collectors: C. Pritchard, M. Heaton, E. Funnell

Additional Data: (Pollution, Condition of Fish, Habitat Conditions)

Continued on Reverse

Species Captured

Species Code No.Caught

No. Kept Size Range(T.L. in mm)

Atlantic Salmon Fingerlings 077 1 4 72Atlantic Salmon Fingerlings 077 1 2 58Atlantic Salmon Fingerlings 077 1 2 54Atlantic Salmon Fingerlings 077 1 3 62Atlantic Salmon Fingerlings 077 1 2 62Atlantic Salmon Fingerlings 077 1 1 48

Brook Trout 080 1 45 164Brook Trout 080 1 12 110Brook Trout 080 1 29 143Brook Trout 080 1 12 109Brook Trout 080 1 21 130Brook Trout 080 1 36 157Brook Trout 080 1 22 133Brook Trout 080 1 14 115Brook Trout 080 1 18 121Brook Trout 080 1 12 104Brook Trout YOY 5 73Brook Trout YOY 5 66

Identified By: M. Heaton Date: 08/28/08

Station Diagram(Include a map that illustrates clearly, at an appropriate scale, the location of each collection site and a diagram that illustratesthe features of that site. Sites where no specimens were caught must also be included.

Finnerty Sdrd N

* Sites marked with pink flagging tape

InnisL

akeR

d

50m

Licence to Collect Fish for Scientific PurposesField Collection Record

Licence No: 1046210 Licencee Name: Doug ForderBusiness Name: Ontario Streams Telephone: 905-713-

7399Fax: 905-713-7361

Mailing Address: 50 Bloomington Rd W. Town/City: Aurora Postal Code: L4G 3G8Waterbody Name: Coffey Creek Township/Municipality: CaledonGeneral Description of Sampling Site Location/Access:17886 The Gore Rd – Coffey Creek Farm; Sites 5 and 6, downstream of Finnerty Sideroad

Collection Site No. 4 of 4 Site UTM Coordinates: 589040 E 4865225 NCollection Date: 09/02/08 Start Time: 10:45 End Time: 11:30 Duration (hrs) 0.75Electrofisher Seconds: 903 Length of Station (m) 50 Water Temp. (C)

17.5Air Temp. (C) 22.0

Stream Type: Intermittent X Permanent Watercress Present: Yes X NoWaterbody Type: Spring Canal X Stream/River River/Lake Junction Flooded Area

Pool Pond Lake Reservoir Muskeg/BogOther (Describe)____________________________________________________Rock 5 Boulder 5 Rubble Gravel 35 Sand 60Silt Clay Muck Marl Detritus

Bottom Type byPercent:(Total = 100%) Other (Description)Current: Still Slow X Medium Fast Quantitative (m/s) _______________Water Colour/Clarity: X Colourless Yellow/Brown Blue/Green Turbid

Other __________________ Secchi Depth: (m) _________________Aquatic Vegetation: Submergent Floating Emergent X NoneCover (Shore): None Sparse X Moderate Dense Other ______________________Cover (In Water): None Sparse X Moderate Dense Other ______________________Gear: Seine Gill Net Dip Net Angled Trawl Minnow Trap Piscicide

Trap Net X Electrofisher Surber Other _____________________________________

Mesh Size (cm)Size of Net (Gill or Seine Net)Length (m):

Size of Net or Mouth(Trap, Hoop or Trawl) (m): Smallest: Largest:

Selectivity of Sample: All Kept X None Kept* Some Kept* No Catch* Record released fish on back.

Date: Day 02 Month 09 Year 2008Collectors: C. Pritchard, P. Davis, B. Vickery

Additional Data: (Pollution, Condition of Fish, Habitat Conditions)

Continued on Reverse

Species Captured

Species Code No.Caught

No. Kept Size Range(T.L. in mm)

Longnose Dace 211 3 11.5 71-76Blacknose Dace 210 24 58.2 35-81Common White Sucker 163 5 103.6 114-141Mottled Sculpin 381 5 30.0 66-78Creek Chub 212 19 68.1 34-103Brook Trout 080 1 33.2 149Brown Trout 078 1 21.3 130Atlantic Salmon 077 1 2.1 61Atlantic Salmon 077 1 1.8 63

Identified By: C. Pritchard, P. Davis, B. Vickery Date: 09/02/08

Station Diagram(Include a map that illustrates clearly, at an appropriate scale, the location of each collection site and a diagram that illustratesthe features of that site. Sites where no specimens were caught must also be included.

Finnerty Sdrd N

footbridge

The

Gore

Rd

50m

Licence to Collect Fish for Scientific PurposesField Collection Record

Licence No: 1046210 Licencee Name: Doug ForderBusiness Name: Ontario Streams Telephone: 905-713-

7399Fax: 905-713-7361

Mailing Address: 50 Bloomington Rd W. Town/City: Aurora Postal Code: L4G 3G8Waterbody Name: Coffey Creek Township/Municipality: CaledonGeneral Description of Sampling Site Location/Access:Highfield’s Farm – Stewart Property By-Pass Channel, Site 7

Collection Site No. 3of 4 Site UTM Coordinates: 587066 E 4863841NCollection Date: 08/28/08 Start Time: 2:15 End Time: 2:30 Duration (hrs) 0.25Electrofisher Seconds: 284 Length of Station (m) 62 Water Temp. (C)

14.0Air Temp. (C) 25.3

Stream Type: Intermittent X Permanent Watercress Present: Yes X NoWaterbody Type: Spring Canal X Stream/River River/Lake Junction Flooded Area

Pool Pond Lake Reservoir Muskeg/BogOther (Describe)____________________________________________________Rock 100 Boulder Rubble Gravel SandSilt Clay Muck Marl Detritus

Bottom Type byPercent:(Total = 100%) Other (Description)Current: Still Slow X Medium X Fast Quantitative (m/s) _______________Water Colour/Clarity: X Colourless Yellow/Brown Blue/Green Turbid

Other __________________ Secchi Depth: (m) _________________Aquatic Vegetation: Submergent Floating Emergent X NoneCover (Shore): None Sparse X Moderate Dense Other ______________________Cover (In Water): None Sparse X Moderate Dense Other ______________________Gear: Seine Gill Net Dip Net Angled Trawl Minnow Trap Piscicide

Trap Net X Electrofisher Surber Other _____________________________________

Mesh Size (cm)Size of Net (Gill or Seine Net)Length (m):

Size of Net or Mouth(Trap, Hoop or Trawl) (m): Smallest: Largest:

Selectivity of Sample: All Kept X None Kept* Some Kept* No Catch* Record released fish on back.

Date: Day 28 Month 08 Year 2008Collectors: C. Pritchard, M. Heaton, E. Funnell

Additional Data: (Pollution, Condition of Fish, Habitat Conditions)

Continued on Reverse

Species Captured

Species Code No.Caught

No. Kept Size Range(T.L. in mm)

Brook Trout 080 1 79 199Brook Trout 080 1 32 138Brook Trout 080 1 5 86Brook Trout 080 1 5 85Brook Trout 080 1 6 85Brook Trout 080 1 7 95Brook Trout 080 1 3 68

Identified By: M. Heaton Date: 08/28/08

Station Diagram(Include a map that illustrates clearly, at an appropriate scale, the location of each collection site and a diagram that illustratesthe features of that site. Sites where no specimens were caught must also be included.

N

Property access road

62m by-passchannelold channel

old pondarea