co-operative fisheries inventory program 2000 summary ... · database - fisheries management...

Co-operative Fisheries Inventory Program 2000

Summary Report for the Marten and Sawridge Creek Drainages

by: Leanne Osokin

Fisheries Technician

Alberta Conservation Association

Northwest Boreal Region March 2001

Alberta Conservation Association Co-operative Fisheries Inventory Program 2001

Executive Summary The Slave Lake areas Co-operative Fisheries Inventory Program (CFIP) is a product of the collaborative effort of the Alberta Conservation Association (ACA), Alberta Environment, Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd. (Slave Lake Division), and Slave Lake Pulp. The purpose of this program is to sample pre-selected drainages for baseline fish population and fish habitat data. This was the first formal fisheries data collection effort for these two FMAs. This season's effort was unique in that the inventory sites were pre-selected according to criteria established with the funding partners. This protocol was established so the data assembly could be implemented into a 'predictive model' format. The Sawridge and Marten Creek watersheds were established as the priority drainages. Sampling began on May 15 and concluded on August 30. In total, 31 and 30 inventory sites were sampled on Sawridge and Marten Creeks respectively. Of these, 5 permanent sample plots were established on both drainages for future fisheries assessments. Sampling results indicated that 35% of the sites completed on Sawridge Creek contained fish, 52% were barren of fish, and 13% were sampled for habitat only (intermittent creeks). Sites completed on Marten Creek included 47% with fish, 43% contained no fish, and 10% were sampled for habitat only. The data collected from this CFIP effort was entered into the Provincial Fisheries database - Fisheries Management Information System (FMIS). Program deliverables for the funding partners include GIS products in the form of maps and digital inventory data, a catalogue of the stream site reports as well as a summary report. These data can be implemented as a resource management tool in the timber harvest planning process..


2

Acknowledgements The Co-operative Fisheries Inventory Program was originally developed in the Northwest Boreal Region in 1994. The success of the Program lead to the expansion of the CFIP to include other Forest Management Agreement (FMA) holders. Appreciation is extended to those individuals who participated in the CFIP and made it the successful program that it is today. Appreciation and acknowledgement is extended to Alberta’s anglers whose contributions fund the Fisheries Management Enhancement Program of the Alberta Conservation Association. Special thanks are extended to Messrs. Luigi Morgantini and Ian Whitby of Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd. and Mr. Perm Sieusahai of Slave Lake Pulp for supporting the project and providing helicopter time. The assistance of Darrell Walde (Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd.) and Bert Durgan (Slave Lake Pulp) for supplying maps and logistical information was also very important. Thanks to the following individuals for data collection:

Alberta Conservation Association - John Tchir

Alberta Environment - Martin Brilling and David DeRosa

Remote Helicopters - Anatoli Ivanov and Lev Mekeev Alberta Environment/Natural Resources Service supplied equipment, office and warehouse space and provided input regarding this project. The Regional Resources Mapping Unit provided spatial data. The guidance and assistance provided throughout this project by Paul Hvenegaard, Al Wildeman, Kevin Gardiner, and Kevin Fitzsimmons was also greatly appreciated.


3

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 1 Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... 2 List of Tables ................................................................................................................... 4 List of Figures.................................................................................................................. 4 List of Plates ................................................................................................................... 4 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Project Objectives .............................................................................................. 5 2.0 Background ............................................................................................................... 6

2.1 Study Area ............................................................................................................. 6 2.2 Landscape Use ...................................................................................................... 7

3.0 Methods .................................................................................................................... 9 3.1 Field Program ........................................................................................................ 9

3.1.1. Site Selection ........................................................................................................ 9 3.1.2 Location............................................................................................................ 10 3.1.3 Water Quality.................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Biological Parameters (Fish Population Description) ............................................ 10 3.2.1 Fish Collection .................................................................................................. 10 3.2.2 Population Estimates ........................................................................................ 11 3.2.3 Permanent Sample Plots .................................................................................. 11 3.2.4 Species Identification ........................................................................................ 11 3.2.5 Lifestage Descriptions ...................................................................................... 11

3.3 Physical Parameters (Habitat Description) ........................................................... 12 3.4 Deliverables ......................................................................................................... 12

3.4.1 Data Storage and Management ........................................................................ 12 3.4.2 Data Summary Binders .................................................................................... 12 3.4.3 GIS Deliverable ................................................................................................ 13 3.4.4 Media ............................................................................................................... 13 4.0 Results .................................................................................................................... 13

4.1 Marten Creek Drainage (Weyerhaeuser Slave Lake's FMA) ................................ 13 4.1.1 Historical Surveys ............................................................................................. 13 4.1.2 Inventory Sites .................................................................................................. 14 4.1.2.1 Habitat Evaluation ............................................................................................. 14 4.1.2.2 Fisheries Evaluation .......................................................................................... 16 4.1.3 Tributaries to Marten Creek (excluding Cabin Creek) ....................................... 18 4.1.4 Cabin Creek ..................................................................................................... 19 4.1.5 Permanent Sample Plots ...................................................................................... 19 4.1.6 Summary Table of Marten Creek Sites ............................................................. 19

4.2 Sawridge Creek Drainage (Slave Lake Pulp's FMA) ............................................. 20 4.2.1 Historical Surveys ............................................................................................. 20 4.2.2 Inventory Sites .................................................................................................. 21 4.2.2.1 Habitat Evaluation ............................................................................................. 22 4.2.2.2 Fisheries Evaluation .......................................................................................... 23 4.2.3 Tributaries to Sawridge Creek .......................................................................... 25 4.2.4 Permanent Sample Plots ...................................................................................... 25 4.2.5 Summary Table of Sawridge Creek Sites ......................................................... 26 5.0 Summary ................................................................................................................. 27 6.0 References .............................................................................................................. 28


4

List of Tables Table 1. Summary of the criteria used to define lifestages of sport fish (McLeod et al.

2000)...................................................................................................................... 12 Table 2. Summary of fish species found in the Marten Creek drainage ......................... 17 Table 3. Summary of the CFIP sites completed on the Marten Creek drainage for the

2000 season……………………………………………………………………………….20 Table 4 Summary of fish species found in the Sawridge Creek drainage for the CFIP

2000 season .......................................................................................................... 24 Table 5. Summary of the CFIP sites completed on the Sawridge Creek drainage for the

2000 season...……………………………………………………………………………..26

List of Figures Figure 1. Study Area of the CFIP..................................................................................... 8 Figure 2. Location of CFIP inventory sites completed in the Marten Creek drainage for

the 2000 season ..................................................................................................... 15 Figure 3. CFIP fish capture locations on the Marten Creek drainage ............................. 17 Figure 4. Length-frequency distribution of Arctic grayling captured in Marten Creek under

the CFIP, summer 2000. ........................................................................................ 18 Figure 5. Location of CFIP inventory sites completed in the Sawridge Creek drainage . 22 Figure 6. CFIP fish capture locations on the Sawridge Creek drainage for the 2000

season ................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 7. Length-frequency distribution of ARGR caught in Sawridge Creek ............... 25

List of Plates Plate 1. Site completed on a tributary to Sawridge Creek showing burnt riparian zone…9 Plate 2. Silt deposits just upstream of T4 on Location ID 20713 just after high water….16 Plate 3. Aerial photo of middle section of the Sawridge Creek channel……………….…21


5

1.0 Introduction This document represents the first Co-operative Fisheries Inventory Program (CFIP) effort to take place in the Northwest Boreal Region (NWB) – Alberta Environment (AE) High Prairie Management Area. This report includes a summary of results of the 2000 inventory effort as well as an outline of the protocol of the CFIP. The Results section includes a brief historical fisheries and watershed background for the selected drainages. A summary spreadsheet outlining all the inventory sites with the corresponding pre-selection criteria is provided Industry partnerships in the High Prairie Area were formed with Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd. (Slave Lake Division) and Slave Lake Pulp (Division of West Fraser Timber) and AE. The Alberta Conservation Association’s (ACA) ability to successfully deliver this program depends upon these successful partnerships. The CFIP for the High Prairie Area is unique in that one of the objectives was to collect data that could be incorporated into a predictive model. This model would be used to compare relationships between landscapes and aquatic communities. This objective had not been previously incorporated into CFIP protocols. In order to achieve the predictive model objective, stream data for sample site locations were pre-selected based on strata established with the contributing partners. These strata were: Natural Region Stream order Broad cover group Stand age Permanent sample plots were also established on each of the drainages for the purpose of monitoring changes (if any) in the species status or habitat structure over time.

1.1 Project Objectives The main project objectives for the CFIP were to:

i. Gather data on fish species assemblages and aquatic habitats in prioritised watersheds of the High Prairie Area. Data collected would include description of fish habitat types, fish species composition and population status (where possible).

ii. Store collected fisheries information in the Provincial Fisheries Management Information System (FMIS) database.

iii. Provide data in a format that can be used to make proactive resource management and development decisions.

Encourage and pursue partnership opportunities with government agencies, private industry, and special interest groups in the area of data collection, funding and delivery of a fisheries inventory program.


6

2.0 Background One of the most important components of fisheries management is baseline inventory to monitor results of management decisions (McLeod et al. 2000). In the Slave Lake area, there has been a lack of baseline fisheries inventory in a majority of the drainages. As a result, changes in fish populations and habitat have never been monitored. The absence of reliable and current baseline inventory is recognised as a barrier to sound management decisions with respect to fish populations and fish habitat (D.A. Westworth 1992). Often decisions concerning fisheries management are based upon inconsistent sources such as personal observation and anecdotal information. Although this type of information is invaluable, it can not be easily quantified and incorporated into scientifically based fish management strategies. Resource industries are also affected by this lack of reliable data, as the information is not available for incorporation into development strategies. This can lead to reactive rather than proactive fish population and habitat management strategies (McLeod et al. 2000). The current trend towards self-regulation means the various resource development industries have assumed the responsibility to collect and integrate fisheries data into their management plans. While this initiative is commendable, it is not practical for all user groups on the same landscape to independently collect and store fisheries data. The most efficient method for proper resource management is a standardised data collection methodology, storage and retrieval system that can be accessed in one location. The Co-operative Fisheries Inventory Program (CFIP) was designed to augment these informational deficiencies. The CFIP originated in the Northwest Boreal Region in 1994. This program uses the strengths of partnerships as well as incorporating consistent methods of data collection, storage and retrieval. The success of this program lead to CFIP opportunities in the East Slopes Region as well as to other Forest Management Agreements (FMAs) in the Northwest Boreal Region. Meetings were established with the ACA, AE, Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd. and Slave Lake Pulp operating in the High Prairie Area to discuss co-operative fish inventory possibilities for the year 2000. These meetings were successful and priority drainages and sample site criteria were established for the field season. Weyerhaeuser and Slave Lake Pulp both obtained monies through the Forest Resource Improvement Association of Alberta (FRIAA), a trust fund that generates revenue from stumpage fees. The ACA provided staff and equipment to co-ordinate, administer and deliver the program. The ACA obtained funding from the Fisheries Management Enhancement Program, which generates revenue from levies on license sales.

2.1 Study Area The two FMA are within the ACA’s Northwest Boreal Region and located in the current NRS High Prairie Management Area (Figure 1). Weyerhaeuser Canada's FMA encompasses an area approximately 666 321 hectares (D. Walde, Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd., pers. comm.). It is situated along the north and east of Lesser Slave Lake, with another portion of their FMA located directly south of the Slave Lake town site.


7

Slave Lake Pulp's FMA is approximately 629 996 hectares (B. Durgen, Slave Lake Pulp, pers. comm.) and encompasses the Swan Hills area south and west of Lesser Slave Lake (Figure 1). Watertight Solutions Ltd. (1999) describes the uplands of the Slave Lake region as relatively well drained and forested with pure and mixed stands of stands of pine, white spruce, aspen, balsam poplar, and balsam fir. The lowlands are described as “flat with low relief and characterised by stands of black spruce and tamarack on poorly drained mineral and organic soils”. Soils in the region are derived from glacial materials and range from clay loams to sandy loams (Watertight Solutions Ltd. 1999). The drainages of Marten Creek (Weyerhaeuser) and Sawridge Creek (Slave Lake Pulp) were selected as the priority watersheds. Marten Creek is located approximately 28 km Northeast of Slave Lake. The watershed drains a portion of the Marten Mountains including the western most Marten Lake before flowing through the community of Marten Beach and entering Lesser Slave Lake. Marten Creek is approximately 64.5 km in length and drains 238 km2. Cabin Creek, a sub-basin of the Marten drainage, enters at approximately 17 km from the mouth of Marten Creek. Marten Creek contains three natural regions within its drainage including the Lower Foothills, Central Mixedwood and the Dry Mixedwood Regions. Sawridge Creek is a tributary to the Lesser Slave River. Originating in the Swan Hills it flows directly through the town of Slave Lake. Sawridge Creek is approximately 54.9 km long and drains 257 km2 . The natural regions represented in the Sawridge drainage are the Upper Foothills, Lower Foothills, Central Mixedwood and the Dry Mixedwood regions.

2.2 Landscape Use Marten and Sawridge Creek drainage basins are impacted by resource development from various industrial activities. These activities have not only altered the landscape due to resource removal, but have increased access to the area through road and cutline development. These access routes are heavily used by recreationalists (all terrain vehicles, snowmobiles, mountain bikes etc) and anglers. Industrial development in the Marten Creek drainage includes gravel extraction, oil and gas exploration and logging activity in the vicinity of a few tributaries. In addition, some stream channel alteration has occurred in sections that flow through the Marten Beach sub-division. Industrial development in the Sawridge Creek drainage includes oil and gas exploration. There has also been extensive channel manipulation within the town limits of Slave Lake.


8

Figure 1. Study Area of the CFIP

0 200 400

kilometers Lethbridge

Medicine

Hat

Red

Deer

Calgary

Edmonton

Grande

Prairie

Weyerhaeuser Canada’s FMA

Slave Lake Pulp’s FMA

N


9

As well, the creek receives treated wastewater from the town sewage lagoons. The headwater areas of Sawridge Creek were also subjected to a forest fire in 1998 that burned most of the riparian vegetation (Plate 1). Salvage logging has in turn occurred on the breaks of the Sawridge watershed.

Plate 1. Site completed on a tributary to Sawridge Creek showing burnt riparian zone

3.0 Methods The Slave Lake area inventory program adhered to the methodologies developed for the Northwest Boreal Region's CFIP (Hvenegaard 1998). As such, some of the protocols are not described and are referred to Hvenegaard (1998). All data collected were recorded on standardised data forms. Data were then entered into Alberta Environment's Provincial Fisheries Management Information System (FMIS) database..

3.1 Field Program

3.1.1. Site Selection The priority drainages of Marten and Sawridge Creek had minimal baseline fish and fish habitat data. In total, 50 sites (25 for each drainage) were decided as the objective for the season. This effort was then spread equally throughout the pre-selection strata. It was determined that stream order (as defined by Strahler 1957), Natural Region, stand type (deciduous, coniferous, deciduous dominant mixedwood, and coniferous dominant mixedwood), and stand age by decade, would be the strata for consideration in the


10

planning stages. Access was also considered. Additional sites were also chosen in highly remote areas where a helicopter would be necessary should one be available during the season. All sites had an additional back-up site chosen that possessed the same criteria as the original.

3.1.2 Location Location details Location was described as per Hvenegaard (1998).

3.1.3 Water Quality Water quality data were collected at each inventory site. Parameters measured included water temperature (oC), pH, conductivity (micromhos/cm), dissolved oxygen (mg/L) and water clarity. Water clarity was estimated by ocular means. Water quality (dissolved

oxygen and temperature) were measured with a WTW - 330 Oximeter; pH and

conductivity measurements were measured with separate Pinpoint meters.

3.2 Biological Parameters (Fish Population Description) Fish population descriptions focused on determining species assemblages, seasonal distribution, life stage representation and relative abundance (McLeod et al.1999).

3.2.1 Fish Collection The primary method used for fish collection was backpack electrofishing using a Smith Root Type XII with an applied pulsed direct current (PDC). Water conditions dictated the settings used to obtain the desired output of the electroshocker. In general, an output of 0.3-0.5 amperes was achieved depending on depth and conductivity. The standard length of water electrofished was 250 m. Electricity was applied to the stream in a discontinuous manner which allowed the crew to fish preferred habitats rather than have a constant electrical field push fish out of areas. At some survey sites, backpack electrofishing was not effective due to the depth of water. At these sites gill netting, minnow traps, and research angling were used as sampling methods. Specific parameters and standardised reporting procedures for each capture method are summarised below:

Electrofishing - number of seconds (s) the system is activated and amount (meters) of stream sampled; catch reported as number of fish/kilometer or number of fish/100 seconds

Gill netting - area (m2) of net fished and duration of the set (hours); catch reported as number of fish/net-unit where 1 net is the equivalent of 100 m2 of net fished for 24 hours.

Minnow traps - number of traps and catch/24 hours.

Angling - total time (h) an individual or group spent angling; catch reported as number of fish/angler hour.

For sites with very poor fisheries potential (intermittent creeks, severe gradient,


11

ephemeral streams), only habitat parameters were recorded.

3.2.2 Population Estimates Population estimates were to be carried out in each of the drainages surveyed. However, none of the sites inventoried contained an adequate number of electrofished-sportfish to conduct a population estimate.

3.2.3 Permanent Sample Plots Ten permanent sample plots, five in each drainage were established. Sites were selected at the discretion of the CFIP crew and based on accessibility, sportfish presence and fish habitat. Rebar markers1.5 m long were sprayed with fluorescent paint and pounded into the right upper bank every 50 m in each 250 m section to permit future relocation.

3.2.4 Species Identification All fish species caught were identified according to Nelson and Paetz (1992) and measured to +/- 1.0 mm at the fork (FL). Fish species were recorded as acronyms (ie. Arctic grayling=ARGR) as indicated in Mackay et al. (1990). All non-sportfish species were identified and measured +/- 1.0 mm at the fork (FL) for a total of fifty individuals. Any additional fish captured after the first 50 were then enumerated. Fish not captured but identified with confidence were recorded as observed and included as part of the catch. Any fish not readily identified in the field were retained for identification in a laboratory setting.

3.2.5 Lifestage Descriptions During the CFIP inventory, different lifestages of sportfish species were documented in the field whenever they were observed. These various stages serve as important biological indicators for fisheries managers as they indicate how the species is utilizing different sections of a stream. As an example, the capture of young-of-year (YOY) indicates that mature adults have successfully spawned and that the offspring are now using the stream for rearing purposes. This type of information can influence the location of industrial development along a stream. The following table from McLeod et al. (1999) has been included to explain the criteria used to define each specific lifestage.


12

Table 1. Summary of the criteria used to define lifestages of sport fish (McLeod et al. 2000)

Lifestage Acronym Forklength

Range (mm) Other Physical

features Possible Indications

Young of the Year

YOY <100 Par marks

Successful recruitment (Adult use for spawning and YOY use for rearing)

Juvenile JUV 100 - 250 No par marks

Not sexually mature

Stream is used for rearing purposes by juveniles

Adult ADL >250 Sexually

mature

Adult use for spawning, overwintering and/or rearing

*Table applies to sport fish species only

3.3 Physical Parameters (Habitat Description)

Physical parameters were described as per Hvenegaard (1998).

3.4 Deliverables

3.4.1 Data Storage and Management Inventory data collected were entered onto an Excel spreadsheet, then loaded into the Provincial Fisheries Management Information System (FMIS). Data in FMIS were extracted for report production, creation of GIS products, fisheries summaries and other

data analyses using Oracle Discover software. The database assigned all the streams sampled with the unique identifiers of Location and Habitat IDs, which are used to discern between sample sites. The original inventory data forms were organised into a binder, along with available hard copy photos and slides. These are all stored with Alberta Environment in the High Prairie Area and Slave Lake Area Offices.

3.4.2 Data Summary Binders A "Catalogue of Sample Sites for the Marten and Sawridge Drainages" (Osokin 2000) which represents the assemblage of data collected from all survey locations was one of the main deliverables in this program. Included is a summary of habitat and fisheries information, map locations of all survey sites, as well as print-outs of all corresponding photos. This catalogue was provided to all the contributing partners.


13

3.4.3 GIS Deliverable A digital Excel spreadsheet was provided to the Industry Partners that contained the full inventory information (habitat and fisheries data) for each site sampled. Full-scale map print-outs were also provided. These maps showed the drainages surveyed with their corresponding inventory sites. The sites are labelled with Location and Habitat Identifications assigned by the FMIS.

3.4.4 Media The project was highlighted in the local media whenever possible. Two local papers, the Lakeside Leader and the Dog Island Sun, published articles highlighting the CFIP. The CFIP was also presented at the ACA Partners in Conservation Conference in Edmonton highlighting the partnerships established with the Program. A field trip was also organized by the ACA inventory crew and took place on a site on Marten Creek (Location 20703, Habitat 8) on July 20, 2000. An informative hand out describing the program and the electroshocking methodology was provided.

4.0 Results Stream inventories were conducted during the open water season beginning on May 15 and concluding on August 31, 2000. A total of 61 sites were completed on the two drainages with 30 sites accomplished on the Marten drainage and 31 completed on the Sawridge drainage. This includes establishing 10 permanent sample plots, five in each drainage, for future sampling and comparison. The following summary is divided according to drainage basin and details survey results for each creek.

4.1 Marten Creek Drainage (Weyerhaeuser Slave Lake's FMA)

4.1.1 Historical Surveys Alberta Environment completed a baseline fisheries and habitat inventory of Marten Creek in 1975 (Rhude 1976). This survey utilized explosive 'B' lines for fish collections. Fish were captured at only one of the surveyed stations, located in the upper mid-section of the creek. Two Arctic grayling with a mean forklength of 133 mm and a mean weight of 20 gms were recorded. The habitat information from this 1975 survey recorded Marten Creek as having good sport fisheries potential from its headwaters down to ~3 to 4 miles from the mouth. At this point, it was stated that extensive construction for the 'new Wabasca Road' degraded the stream due to siltation and erosion. To the west of the construction, log jams and substrates of sand and silt were prevalent (Rhude 1976). The lower region of the stream, comprised of 1/5 of the creek's surveyed length, had low sport fisheries potential (Rhude 1976).


14

Lucko and Todd (1997) performed a walleye spawning assessment at 2 sampling areas upstream of the lower bridge crossing, near the Marten Creek subdivision. Eighteen kick samples produced 3 small eggs, 1.5 mm in diameter (species unknown - eggs too small to be walleye) and 314 pike and/or sucker eggs (egg diameter 3.0 mm) (Lucko et al. 1997). Lucko and Todd (1997) also stated that the habitat between the lake and the lower bridge crossing consisted of shallow pools, 0.4 to 2.0 m deep with silt substrates. Between 1991 and 1993, the Water Management Branch of NRS performed a water quality analysis of the Marten watershed (Noton 1998). It found that Marten Creek had low total dissolved solids and alkalinity (open water data) as well as a high median concentration of tannin and lignin (components of plant material). Winter oxygen concentrations measured between 1990 and 1992 were found to be consistently above 8 mg/l, well above the critical of 3 mg/l needed for fish survival (D.DeRosa, pers. comm.).

4.1.2 Inventory Sites A total of 30 inventory sites were completed on this drainage (Figure 2). The following map outline the site locations throughout the drainage including the Location ID's and Habitat ID's that were assigned from FMIS. The outlined red points represent permanent sample plots established.

4.1.2.1 Habitat Evaluation The following summary of Marten Creek drainage outlines the key habitat findings for the inventory sites along the main stem of the creek. Inventory of the mainstem of Marten Creek confirmed findings of previous habitat surveys (Rhude 1976), specifically that it contained a good sportfish potential. In the headwaters, Marten Creek originates from a fen bog habitat with extremely deep channels and a soft bottomed substrate (Location ID 20702, Habitat ID 7). The riparian habitat consists of grass with black spruce growing sporadically throughout. The stream habitat is comprised mainly of deep runs and pools with little to no riffle habitat present. The next site downstream (Location ID 20712, Habitat 17) contained excellent habitat for rearing and overwintering ARGR. The dark tannic stained water and woody debris in the channel provided excellent cover for the juvenile ARGR, which were captured at this site. The riffle/pool/run ratio and a number of deeper pools created diversity in stream habitat suitable for all life stages of ARGR. The bank stability of the downstream sections of the main-stem Marten Creek decreased as the stream gradient increased. This may have been the cause of the increased silt load observed at downstream sites. One site in particular (Location ID 20713, Habitat ID 18) contained 100% fine substrates and very tannic, chocolate-colored water. Abundant slumping was evident along both banks (Plate 2). This site was delegated as a permanent sample plot.


15

The remaining mainstem sites, downstream to the highway 88 crossing, contained high ratings for sportfish overwintering. These sites contained numerous deep pools and runs with good fish refugia in the form of instream debris and rock/boulder structure. All these sites contained a high ratio of pool/riffle/run habitat. However, spawning potential in the main stem was limited to pockets of smaller gravel interspersed amongst substrates consisting of larger gravels and cobbles.

Figure 2. Location of CFIP inventory sites completed in the Marten Creek drainage for the 2000 season No inventory sites were chosen below the highway 88 crossing. The depth and size of the water would have made sampling effectiveness low. The habitat becomes quite homogenous, consisting of slow moving run habitat with silt substrate bottom.

Creek

Creek

Highway 754

Cab

in

Marten

Highw

ay 88

kilometers

Location ID:20721Location ID:20721Location ID:20721Location ID:20721Location ID:20721Location ID:20721Location ID:20721Location ID:20721Location ID:20721

Habitat ID:26Habitat ID:26Habitat ID:26Habitat ID:26Habitat ID:26Habitat ID:26Habitat ID:26Habitat ID:26Habitat ID:26






























































16

Plate 2. Silt deposits just upstream of T4 on Location ID 20713 just after high water

(photo taken Aug 16, 2000)

4.1.2.2 Fisheries Evaluation

Except for the extreme headwaters, Arctic grayling were found within all mainstream inventory sites of Marten Creek (Figure 3). Of the 30 CFIP sites sampled, 14 of the sites contained fish species (sport and/or non-sport species) while 13 were void of any fish. Three sites were inventoried for habitat only as they were either intermittent or contained poor fisheries habitat.


17

Figure 3. CFIP fish capture locations on the Marten Creek drainage Table 2 provides a summary of the fish community composition found in the Marten Creek drainage.

Table 2. Summary of fish species found in the Marten Creek drainage

Species Taxa

Acro

ny

m

Sp

ecie

s

Pre

sen

t

To

tal

% o

f

Catc

h

SPORT

Arctic grayling Thymallus arcticus ARGR 74 10.9

NON SPORT

Brook stickleback Culaea inconstans BRST 48 7.1

Lake chub Couesius plumbeus LKCH 433 64.1

Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae LNDC 11 1.6

Pearl Dace Semotilus margarita PRDC 34 5.0

Longnose sucker Catastomus catostomus LNSC 66 9.8

White sucker C. commersoni WHSC 10 1.5

Total 676 100

Cree

k

Cree

k

Highw

ay 7

54

Highw

ay 7

54

Highw

ay 7

54

Highw

ay 7

54

Highw

ay 7

54

Highw

ay 7

54

Highw

ay 7

54

Highw

ay 7

54

Highw

ay 7

54

Cab

inCab

inCab

inCab

inCab

inCab

inCab

inCab

inCab

inMarten

ARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCH

ARGR, LKCH, LNSC,ARGR, LKCH, LNSC,ARGR, LKCH, LNSC,ARGR, LKCH, LNSC,ARGR, LKCH, LNSC,ARGR, LKCH, LNSC,ARGR, LKCH, LNSC,ARGR, LKCH, LNSC,ARGR, LKCH, LNSC,

PRCD, WHSC,PRCD, WHSC,PRCD, WHSC,PRCD, WHSC,PRCD, WHSC,PRCD, WHSC,PRCD, WHSC,PRCD, WHSC,PRCD, WHSC,

ARGR, BRSTARGR, BRSTARGR, BRSTARGR, BRSTARGR, BRSTARGR, BRSTARGR, BRSTARGR, BRSTARGR, BRST

ARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGR

ARGR, LKCH, ARGR, LKCH, ARGR, LKCH, ARGR, LKCH, ARGR, LKCH, ARGR, LKCH, ARGR, LKCH, ARGR, LKCH, ARGR, LKCH,

LNSC, WHSC, LNSC, WHSC, LNSC, WHSC, LNSC, WHSC, LNSC, WHSC, LNSC, WHSC, LNSC, WHSC, LNSC, WHSC, LNSC, WHSC,

LNSCLNSCLNSCLNSCLNSCLNSCLNSCLNSCLNSC

BRSTBRSTBRSTBRSTBRSTBRSTBRSTBRSTBRST

ARGR, LKCH,ARGR, LKCH,ARGR, LKCH,ARGR, LKCH,ARGR, LKCH,ARGR, LKCH,ARGR, LKCH,ARGR, LKCH,ARGR, LKCH,

LNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSC



ARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, LKCHARGR, BRST, LKCH, ARGR, BRST, LKCH, ARGR, BRST, LKCH, ARGR, BRST, LKCH, ARGR, BRST, LKCH, ARGR, BRST, LKCH, ARGR, BRST, LKCH, ARGR, BRST, LKCH, ARGR, BRST, LKCH,

LNSC, PRDC, WHSCLNSC, PRDC, WHSCLNSC, PRDC, WHSCLNSC, PRDC, WHSCLNSC, PRDC, WHSCLNSC, PRDC, WHSCLNSC, PRDC, WHSCLNSC, PRDC, WHSCLNSC, PRDC, WHSC

ARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRBRST, LKCH, BRST, LKCH, BRST, LKCH, BRST, LKCH, BRST, LKCH, BRST, LKCH, BRST, LKCH, BRST, LKCH, BRST, LKCH,

LNSCLNSCLNSCLNSCLNSCLNSCLNSCLNSCLNSC

ARGR, LKCH, LNDC, ARGR, LKCH, LNDC, ARGR, LKCH, LNDC, ARGR, LKCH, LNDC, ARGR, LKCH, LNDC, ARGR, LKCH, LNDC, ARGR, LKCH, LNDC, ARGR, LKCH, LNDC, ARGR, LKCH, LNDC,

LNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSCLNSC, WHSC


18

A skin parasite believed to be White-spot (Ichthyophthirius spp.) (Roberts and Sheperd 1974) was observed on a few lake chub at inventory Location ID 20703. This same growth was also observed on LKCH caught at another tributary to Marten Creek (Location 20704). The average fork length of ARGR caught in the Marten drainage was 121 mm. The largest fish caught in the Marten drainage was 211 mm which is still considered a juvenile fish (Table 1). Marten Creek had 47.9% of young of the year fish in the drainage with the remaining 52.1% as juveniles (no adult fish captured). Although there was an obvious lack in larger adult fish captured, the young of the year presence indicates that spawning ARGR are prevalent in the drainage.

Figure 4. Length-frequency distribution of Arctic grayling captured in Marten Creek under the CFIP, summer 2000.

4.1.3 Tributaries to Marten Creek (excluding Cabin Creek)

This summary combines the general description of the habitat and fisheries findings for tributaries to Marten Creek with the exception of Cabin Creek, which is treated as a separate watershed. Inventory staff identified 4 main tributaries to Marten Creek which were assigned the following Waterbody ID's from FMIS: ID 20014, ID 20016, ID 20017 and ID 20021. The majority of these tributaries were identified as containing moderate fisheries habitat. However, smaller creeks that feed these tributaries were void of fish despite the favourable habitat. Low water levels over the last few years may have contributed to the lack of fish species (D. DeRosa, pers. comm.). The low water levels limited surveys on small, primary tributaries to habitat inventories only.

Marten Creek

0

5

10

15

20

25

40

50

60

70

80

90

10

0

11

0

12

0

13

0

14

0

15

0

16

0

17

0

18

0

19

0

20

0

21

0

22

0

Fork Length (mm)

Per

cen

t o

f A

RG

R (

%)

n = 71

Average FL = 121 mm


19

Arctic grayling were found in Waterbody ID 20016 and ID 20017. Waterbody ID 20016 also contained the highest diversity of fish species (N=6) in the entire watershed (Figure 3). The tributary feeding Marten Creek near its mouth (Waterbody ID 20014) exhibited extensive beaver activity and LNSC were the only species captured.

4.1.4 Cabin Creek Cabin Creek is approximately 16 km long and has been heavily influenced by road crossings from resource extraction. Beavers inhabiting the stream have also influenced this drainage through numerous dams and an increased debris load. Historically, Cabin Creek contained ARGR throughout the majority of its’ drainage (D. DeRosa, pers. comm.). A hanging culvert just above Location ID 20710 may prevent upstream migration of any fish species. Two other culvert crossings, closer to the headwaters, may also restrict migration. The headwaters of Cabin Creek flow through a low gradient, meadows type habitat. The riparian area is primarily grass with standing water pockets. The channel itself is deeply incised with a soft bottom substrate. These deep-water habitats could not be safely backpack electrofished. Small mesh gillnets and dip-netting were employed as the main sampling techniques. A site in the middle section of the creek (Location ID 20720) was sampled by dip-netting due to deep-water habitat created by beaver dams. BRST were collected at this site. The inventory location closest to the junction with Marten Creek was the only site suitable for electroshocking (Location ID 20710). This site contained BRST, LKCH and LNSC (Figure 3) and was established as a permanent sample plot. Many of the small tributaries of Cabin Creek were defined as having good habitat potential for fish. However, no fish were caught or observed at any location sampled. Low water levels may be limiting the accessibility and over-winter survival. The small, primary inventory sites (Location ID 20714 and ID 20721) were only sampled for habitat parameters.

4.1.5 Permanent Sample Plots Five permanent sample plots were established in the Marten Creek drainage (Figure 2). These sites are quad or truck accessible and all contained fish. Except for a site on Cabin Creek (Location ID 20710), all other permanent sites selected contained ARGR.

4.1.6 Summary Table of Marten Creek Sites

The following table is to be used as a quick reference tool for all the sites completed on the Marten drainage and includes all the pre-selection criteria information. The chart is arranged according to the stream order classification (lowest order to highest order), then by Natural Region.


20

Table 3. Summary of the CFIP sites completed on the Marten Creek drainage for the 2000 season

4.2 Sawridge Creek Drainage (Slave Lake Pulp's FMA)

4.2.1 Historical Surveys Historically known as 'Prairie Creek', Sawridge Creek has had very little reported fisheries work completed. The first recorded fisheries project was completed in 1950 to determine if Sawridge Creek was a good candidate for trout stocking (Ward 1951). This report described the stretch of Sawridge Creek upstream of the railway bridge, for 10 water miles, as "an excellent stretch of grayling water". The 1950 descriptions of the entire watershed were remarkably similar as to how creek is at the present with "numerous riffles and fine pools throughout its middle reaches". The lower section through town was described as "slow and deep and lacks riffles altogether" (Ward 1951). A water flow analysis report completed in 1999 describes the main channel of Sawridge Creek as a wide scoured flood plain with little permanent vegetation and a relatively straight channel in its lower section (Plate 3) (Watertight Solutions Ltd. 1999).

Location ID Waterbody IDWaterbody

NameHabitat ID UTM X UTM Y

Stand Age (by

decade)Stream Order Cover Group Natural Region

20714 20022 Unnamed 19 641838.99 6161826.61 1970-1979 1 D Central Mixed Wood

20721 20024 Unnamed 26 637388.94 6158059.16 *HG 1 C Central Mixed Wood

20702 1063 Marten Creek 7 652427.78 6155724.37 1920-1929 /flooded 1 C Lower Foothills

20706 20018 Unnamed 11 641444.70 6156507.60 1920-1929 1 DC Lower Foothills

20708 20019 Unnamed 13 646543.23 6155802.73 1910-1919 1 C Lower Foothills

20715 20022 Unnamed 20 640301.04 6161771.05 1890-1899 2 C Central Mixed Wood

20716 232 Cabin Creek 21 639611.27 6162162.14 flooded 2 C\CD Central Mixed Wood

20717 20023 Unnamed 22 640280.54 6160922.09 1890-1899 2 DC Central Mixed Wood


20709 20020 Unnamed 14 648608.66 6155512.13 *HG 2 C Lower Foothills




20719 20023 Unnamed 24 639540.20 6160650.90 1890-1899 3 C Central Mixed Wood


20698 20014 Unnamed 3 637726.46 6154339.37 1920-1929 3 D Lower Foothills


20701 20016 Unnamed 6 646085.01 6158325.06 1960-1969 3 C\CD Lower Foothills

20707 20017 Unnamed 12 642615.51 6153487.26 1880-1889 3 CD Lower Foothills

20712 1063 Marten Creek 17 653598.29 6159019.04 1950-1959 3 C Lower Foothills

20725 1063 Marten Creek 30 649468.65 6162169.22 1860-1869 3 C Lower Foothills

20710 232 Cabin Creek 15 637129.64 6157194.48 1940-1949 4 D\DC Central Mixed Wood

20713 1063 Marten Creek 18 646897.53 6160760.05 1910-1919 4 CD Central Mixed Wood


20697 20014 Unnamed 2 632432.48 6152621.82 N\A 4 out of AVI area Dry Mixed Wood

20704 20017 Unnamed 9 639550.54 6155847.44 1900-1909 4 CD Lower Foothills

20705 1063 Marten Creek 10 641446.96 6157838.80 1920-1929 5 DC Central Mixed Wood

20724 1063 Marten Creek 29 645866.50 6159960.50 **SO/SC 5 DC Central Mixed Wood

20776 1063 Marten Creek 62 632974.21 6156027.78 1890-1899 5 D Dry Mixed Wood

20703 1063 Marten Creek 8 637856.61 6156391.15 1880-1889 5 D Lower Foothills

*HG - naturally vegetated, non-forested (grassland) C - coniferous CD - coniferous dominated mixed wood

**SO/SC - naturally vegetated, non-forested (shrubs) D - deciduous DC - deciduous dominated mixed wood

***NMS - naturally non-vegetated (sand)


21

This report also describes the Sawridge Creek drainage as having a rapid response and recession of flows in reaction to summer rainfalls; usually peaking within 1-2 days of precipitation and then receding to pre-storm flows in 3 to 5 days.

Plate 3. Aerial photo of middle section of the Sawridge Creek channel

Flood control structures were constructed after a 1988 flood event in the town of Slave Lake. An instream debris-rack was installed just south of the Highway 2 bridge with an overflow channel created just north of the same bridge. The overflow channel allows a portion of Sawridge Creek to by-pass the town during medium to high flow events. Hundreds of unidentified fry were observed in the overflow channel after a high rain event in June 2000 (D. DeRosa, pers. comm.). Within the town itself, the creek has undergone several channelization projects in an effort to reduce erosion of the banks. A habitat survey by Alberta Environment staff in July 2000 indicated that bank erosion and slumping was still highly prevalent between highway 2 and the Lesser Slave River. Sawridge Creek also receives the treated wastewater of the town.

4.2.2 Inventory Sites A total of 31 CFIP inventory sites were completed on this drainage (Figure 5). As with the Marten Creek drainage, 10 of these sites were remote access helicopter sites.


22

Highway 2




Habitat ID:44,64Habitat ID:44,64Habitat ID:44,64Habitat ID:44,64Habitat ID:44,64Habitat ID:44,64Habitat ID:44,64Habitat ID:44,64Habitat ID:44,64








Habitat ID:41Habitat ID:41Habitat ID:41Habitat ID:41Habitat ID:41Habitat ID:41Habitat ID:41Habitat ID:41Habitat ID:41Location ID:20728Location ID:20728Location ID:20728Location ID:20728Location ID:20728Location ID:20728Location ID:20728Location ID:20728Location ID:20728















































Figure 5. Location of CFIP inventory sites completed in the Sawridge Creek drainage

4.2.2.1 Habitat Evaluation The following summary outlines the key habitat findings for the inventory sites in the main stem of Sawridge Creek. In general, the mainstem of the Sawridge drainage has excellent habitat present for rearing and overwintering of sportfish. Numerous deep pools and runs were observed in sections along the main stem. Spawning potential for ARGR is good with observations of suitable spawning habitat in several areas along the inventoried sections of the creek. A grass riparian area situated within a coniferous dominant cover stand characterises the habitat in the Sawridge Creek headwaters. The channels within the upper headwater sites are generally deeply incised, with darkly stained tannic water. Excellent cover is present in the form of woody debris and undercut banks. The middle and upper reaches are dominated by optimal riffle and pool habitat with gravel and cobble as the dominant substrate. This provides excellent sportfish rearing habitat. In the middle reaches, the flood plain is wide and the channel braids frequently.


23

The lower sections of Sawridge Creek varied drastically from the upper and middle sections, mainly due to gradient changes. This reduction in channel gradient produced a run-dominated habitat with fine substrates.

4.2.2.2 Fisheries Evaluation Of the 31 inventory sites completed in the Sawridge Creek drainage, 11 sites contained fish species while 16 of the sites were void of any fish. Four sites were inventoried for habitat only as they were either intermittent or contained poor fisheries habitat. Four previously sampled sites that were void of fish were re-visited at a later time in the season (Location ID's 20731, 30739, 30741, 20742). These sites contained favourable fish habitat and it was speculated that fish may be found once the water temperature had increased. Arctic grayling and lake chub were found at one of the re-inventoried sites (Location ID 20742). This site was also selected as a permanent sample plot. In the mainstem of Sawridge Creek, the majority of inventory sites sampled contained fish. One mainstem site (Location ID 20731) had the highest diversity of fish species of all locations sampled within the 2000 CFIP inventory. This inventory site had 8 different species, one of those being the spoonhead sculpin, identified as a species of unknown status by an Alberta Environment internal report (D. DeRosa, pers. comm.) In two other mainstem locations (Location ID 20753, ID 20754), young of the year-ARGR were captured, an indication of successful spawning. Only two mainstem sites were void of fish, one located in the extreme headwaters (Location ID 20752) as well as one site located closest to the confluence with the Lesser Slave River (Location ID 20726).

Figure 6. CFIP fish capture locations on the Sawridge Creek drainage for the 2000 season

ARGR, LKCH, PRDCARGR, LKCH, PRDCARGR, LKCH, PRDCARGR, LKCH, PRDCARGR, LKCH, PRDCARGR, LKCH, PRDCARGR, LKCH, PRDCARGR, LKCH, PRDCARGR, LKCH, PRDC

LNDC,LNSC,LNDC,LNSC,LNDC,LNSC,LNDC,LNSC,LNDC,LNSC,LNDC,LNSC,LNDC,LNSC,LNDC,LNSC,LNDC,LNSC,

ARGR, BURB, LKCH,ARGR, BURB, LKCH,ARGR, BURB, LKCH,ARGR, BURB, LKCH,ARGR, BURB, LKCH,ARGR, BURB, LKCH,ARGR, BURB, LKCH,ARGR, BURB, LKCH,ARGR, BURB, LKCH,

LNDC, LNSC, SPSC, LNDC, LNSC, SPSC, LNDC, LNSC, SPSC, LNDC, LNSC, SPSC, LNDC, LNSC, SPSC, LNDC, LNSC, SPSC, LNDC, LNSC, SPSC, LNDC, LNSC, SPSC, LNDC, LNSC, SPSC,

PRDCPRDCPRDCPRDCPRDCPRDCPRDCPRDCPRDC



BRST, LKCH, LNSCBRST, LKCH, LNSCBRST, LKCH, LNSCBRST, LKCH, LNSCBRST, LKCH, LNSCBRST, LKCH, LNSCBRST, LKCH, LNSCBRST, LKCH, LNSCBRST, LKCH, LNSC

ARGR, BURB, LKCH, ARGR, BURB, LKCH, ARGR, BURB, LKCH, ARGR, BURB, LKCH, ARGR, BURB, LKCH, ARGR, BURB, LKCH, ARGR, BURB, LKCH, ARGR, BURB, LKCH, ARGR, BURB, LKCH,

LNDC, LNSC, NRPK, LNDC, LNSC, NRPK, LNDC, LNSC, NRPK, LNDC, LNSC, NRPK, LNDC, LNSC, NRPK, LNDC, LNSC, NRPK, LNDC, LNSC, NRPK, LNDC, LNSC, NRPK, LNDC, LNSC, NRPK,

SPSC, WHSCSPSC, WHSCSPSC, WHSCSPSC, WHSCSPSC, WHSCSPSC, WHSCSPSC, WHSCSPSC, WHSCSPSC, WHSC

ARGR, LNSCARGR, LNSCARGR, LNSCARGR, LNSCARGR, LNSCARGR, LNSCARGR, LNSCARGR, LNSCARGR, LNSC

NRPKNRPKNRPKNRPKNRPKNRPKNRPKNRPKNRPK


ARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGRARGR



24

Table 4 is a checklist for the fish community composition for all the fish species found in the Sawridge Creek drainage. It includes the number of individuals as well as the corresponding percentage of the total number of fish caught.

Table 3 Summary of fish species found in the Sawridge Creek drainage for the CFIP 2000 season

Species Taxa

Acro

ny

m

Sp

ec

ie

s

Pre

se

n

t To

tal

%

of

Ca

tch

SPORT

Arctic grayling Thymallus arcticus ARGR 115 14.1

Northern pike Esox lucius NRPK 3 0.4

burbot Lota lota BURB 2 0.2

NON SPORT

Brook stickleback Culaea inconstans BRST 14 1.7

Lake chub Couesius plumbeus LKCH 223 27.4

Longnose dace Rhinichthys cataractae LNDC 238 29.3

Northern redbelly dace

Chrosomus eos NRDC 2 0.2

Pearl Dace Semotilus margarita PRDC 56 6.9

Longnose sucker Catastomus catostomus LNSC 113 13.9

White sucker C. commersoni WHSC 34 4.2

Spoonhead sculpin Cottus ricei SPSC 13 1.6

Total 813 100

Arctic grayling was the most prevalent sport fish within this drainage. The average fork length for ARGR found in the Sawridge drainage was 156 mm. Life stage representation of Arctic grayling was 84.2, 8.8 and 7.0% juvenile, young of the year and adult respectively.


25

Figure 7. Length-frequency distribution of ARGR caught in Sawridge Creek

4.2.3 Tributaries to Sawridge Creek

In general, the larger tributaries of Sawridge Creek contained a high diversity of cover classifying them as favorable for fish rearing. A broad food base was observed in a majority of the tributaries with caddis and dragonfly nymphs found throughout. For some of the smaller tributaries surveyed, low water levels may have been the major contributing factor to the lack of fish presence. Beaver activity was also observed on select creeks with dams creating a potential barrier to fish migration. Of the 21 tributary sites inventoried, only 3 sites contained fish while 18 sites were void of any fish species.

4.2.4 Permanent Sample Plots As with the Marten drainage, 5 permanent sample plots were established within the Sawridge Creek drainage (Figure 5). These sites are either quad or truck accessible with only 3 of the 5 containing fish during the surveys. The habitat for the 2 non-fish bearing sites was rated as having a moderate to high potential for rearing sport fish. They were sampled twice throughout the season to test for any re-colonization.

Sawridge Creek

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

210

220

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

310

Fork Length (mm)

Percen

t of

AR

GR

(%

)

n = 114

Average FL = 156

mm


26

4.2.5 Summary Table of Sawridge Creek Sites The following Table is to be used as a quick reference for all the sites completed on the Sawridge Creek drainage. It outlines the pre-selection criteria information for each inventoried site. The chart is arranged according to the stream order classification (lowest order to highest order), then by Natural Region.

Table 5. Summary of the CFIP sites completed on the Sawridge Creek drainage for the 2000 season

Location IDWaterbody

ID

Waterbody

NameHabitat ID UTM X UTM Y

Stand Age

(by decade)

Stream

OrderCover Group Natural Region



20740 20034 Unnamed 45 633362.96 6117131.30 N\A 1 out of AVI area Lower Foothills



20746 20038 Unnamed 51 630080.66 6108463.43 N\A 1 out of AVI area Upper Foothills

20749 20040 Unnamed 54 633303.89 6111965.56 1940-1949 1 C Upper Foothills





20745 20037 Unnamed 50 628521.24 6109694.14 1940-1949 2 C Upper Foothills


20748 20039 Unnamed 53 636973.93 6113925.46 1940-1949 2 DC Upper Foothills




20739 20033 Unnamed 44 635903.50 6117995.70 1940-1949 3 D\DC Lower Foothills



20752 1524 Sawridge Creek 57 626096.03 6107832.66 N\A 3 out of AVI area Upper Foothills


20744 1524 Sawridge Creek 49 626168.94 6111791.771880-1889/

1920-19294 C\CD Lower Foothills

20751 1524 Sawridge Creek 56 630674.94 6116423.191880-1889/

1940-19494 C\DC Lower Foothills

20753 1524 Sawridge Creek 58 628999.43 6116180.991940-1949/

1910-19194 D\CD Lower Foothills

20754 1524 Sawridge Creek 59 626136.44 6109910.56 1940-1949 4 C Upper Foothills

20805 1524 Sawridge Creek 67 626652.55 6114916.581910-1919/

NMS***4 CD Upper Foothills

20727 1524 Sawridge Creek 32 641211.86 6127145.89 N\A 5 out of AVI area Central Mixed Wood

20726 1524 Sawridge Creek 31 643737.86 6129699.23 N\A 5 out of AVI area Dry Mixed Wood

20731 1524 Sawridge Creek 36 640909.90 6124307.47 1880-1889 5 D Lower Foothills

20734 1524 Sawridge Creek 39 637430.45 6120395.34 1880-1889 5 D Lower Foothills

20736 1524 Sawridge Creek 41 634194.48 6118388.911890-1899/

NMS***5 D Lower Foothills

*HG - naturally vegetated, non-forested (grassland) CD - coniferous dominated mixed wood

**SO/SC - naturally vegetated, non-forested (shrubs) DC - deciduous dominated mixed wood

***NMS - naturally non-vegetated (sand)

C - coniferous

D - deciduous


27

5.0 Summary This area’s CFIP was regarded as a success as the principle objective of a fish and fish habitat inventory in the pre-selected drainages was accomplished. This increased level of knowledge of the Marten and Sawridge drainages can begin to be proactively incorporated into the development of the fisheries resource management recommendations for operational planning. At present, the CFIP data set depicts an instantaneous description of fish species distribution and the habitat in which they occur (Hvenegaard 1998). This baseline fisheries information can be incorporated into a predictive model exercise. With the wide range of information available for both the surrounding landscape and aquatic community, a model may permit streams at a broad landscape level to be classified as to their aquatic resource importance. The ten permanent sample plots established will serve as a monitoring tool for large natural variation in population levels that are inherent in many salmonid species (Platts and Nelson 1988). These variations occur in both time and space. The permanent sample plots will permit monitoring of the fish species structure and fish habitat to examine the effects of land-use development or other environmental factors. It also allows the ability to monitor these sites temporally, to account for seasonal variations in fish populations. The long-term monitoring and management of fish populations and their habitat depends upon the commitment of all user and interest groups. The availability of standardized and timely fisheries information the CFIP provides contributes to the effective management of these natural resources in the area. Benefits of this collective effort are not limited to the funding partners and can be appreciated by the general public by a better managed resource through a shared budget.


28

6.0 References Alberta Environmental Protection. 1994. Natural Regions and Sub Regions of Alberta:

Summary. Berry, D. K. 1998. Alberta's Arctic Grayling Management and Recovery Plan. Alberta

Environmental Protection, Fisheries Management Division. 27 pp. D.A. Westworth and Associates Ltd. 1992. An Overview of Potential Forest

harvesting Impacts of Fish and Fish Habitat in the Northern Boreal Forests of Canada’s Prairie Provinces. Tech. Rep. Prep. For the Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans.

Greenfield, B. and R.N. Riddell. 1997. Ecological Literature Review and Bibliography

for the Slave Lake FMA. Tech. Rep. Prep for Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd. by Riddell Env. Research Ltd.

Hudson, H.R. and D.D. Andres. 1985. Fish Habitat Evaluation Using Geomorphic,

Hydraulic and Hydrologic Characteristics of Selected River Reaches in Alberta. Tech. Doc., Edmonton, AB

Hvenegaard, P. 1998. Co-operative fisheries inventory program. Final Report 1998.

Tech. Rep. Prep. for the Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, by AB. Conser. Assoc. Kowalchuk, S., K. Gardiner, and R. Rudolph. 1999. Catalogue of Inventory Sites

Conducted in 1999. Prepared for Millar Western, and the AE. Edson, Alberta by the AB. Conser. Assc.

Ledig, B., G. Thorsley, M. Watson, and K. Zelt. 1998. Fisheries Management

Information System (FMIS) user manual. Lucko, B. and G. Todd.1997. Lesser Slave Lake Walleye Spawning Assessment, April

- June 1997. AB. Conser. Assoc., Peace River, AB McLeod, C. and K. Gardiner. 2000. Rocky Mountain House and Nordegg Districts Co-

operative Fisheries Inventory Program (CFIP). Annual Report. 1999. Tech. Rep. Prep. for the Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd., Sunpine Forest Products Ltd. and Alberta Environment by the Alberta Conservation Association.

46 pp. + App. Miller, R.B. and M.J. Paetz. 1953. Preliminary biological surveys of Alberta Watersheds

1950-1952. Department of Lands and Forests. 139 pp. Nelson, L.A. and M.J. Paetz. 1992 The Fishes of Alberta. Second Edition. University of

Alberta Press, Edmonton, AB


29

Noton, L. 1998. Water Quality of Lesser Slave Lake and Its Tributaries 1991-93. Alberta Environmental Protection, Water Sciences (Management) Branch.

51 pp. + App. Platts, W.S. and R.L. Nelson. 1998. Fluctuations in trout populations and their

implications for land-use evaluation. North American journal of Fisheries Management 8: 333-345.

Rhude, L.A. 1976. Preliminary Fisheries Survey of the Lakes and Rivers Found in the

Slave Lake Study Area. Recreation, Parks and Wildlife, Fish and Wildlife Division, Edmonton, AB

419pp. Roberts, R.J. and C.J. Sheperd. 1974. Handbook of Trout and Salmon Diseases. Univ.

of Stirling, Unit of Aquatic Pathology, Scotland. 168 pp. Scott, W.B. and E.J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Fish Res. Board

Canada Bull. 194pp. Strahler, A.N. 1957. Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. Transactions Geophysical Union 38:913-920. Ward. 1951. File Data. Alberta Environment, High Prairie Management Area Slave

Lake District Office. Watertight Solutions Ltd. 1999. Watershed Analysis of Marten Creek, near Slave

Lake, Alberta. Summary and Synthesis. Prep. for Weyerhaeuser Canada Ltd. 44 pp.

co-operative fisheries inventory program 2000 summary ... · database - fisheries management...

Documents