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