GMSMON-17 WILLISTON RESERVOIR TRIBUTARY - BC Hydro

Peace Project Water Use Plan 

Williston Reservoir Tributary Habitat Review 

Study Year 1 

Reference: GMSMON-17 

Williston Reservoir Tributary Habitat Review - 2011 Summary 

Report 

Study Period: 2011 

Tanya Seebacher, Kim Poupard, Darryl Arsenault 

Golder Associates Ltd. 

220 – 1755 Springfield Road 

Kelowna, BC V1Y 5V5 

Report Date: May 22, 2012

REPORT 

May 22, 2012 

GMSMON-17 WILLISTON RESERVOIR 

TRIBUTARY HABITAT REVIEW 

Williston Reservoir Tributary 

Habitat Review - 2011 Summary 

Report 

Submitted to: 

Michael McArthur 

Natural Resource Specialist - BC Hydro 

Generation, Environment & Social Issues 

BC Hydro 

6911 Southpoint Drive (E11) 

Burnaby, BC V3N 4X8 

Report Number: 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 

Distribution: 

BC Hydro - 4 Copies 

Golder Associates Ltd. - 1 Copy

Authors 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 i 

GMSMON-17 WILLISTON RESERVOIR TRIBUTARY HABITAT 

REVIEW 

Kim Poupard 1 , Darryl Arsenault 2 , Tanya Seebacher 2 , and David Roscoe 3 

Citation 

Golder. 2012. GMSMON-17 Williston Reservoir Tributary Habitat Review – 2011. Golder Associates Ltd. Project 

#11-1492-0016. Unpublished report by Golder Associates Ltd., Kelowna, BC for BC Hydro - Peace River 

Water Use Plan, Williston Reservoir, BC, 18 pp. + Apps. 

Cover Photo 

Six Mile Bay, Looking north towards Six Mile Creek, May 2011. Photos © Darryl Arsenault, Golder Associates 

Ltd. 

© 2011 BC Hydro 

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in retrieval systems, or transmitted, in any form or by any 

means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior permission from BC Hydro, 

Burnaby, BC. 

1 

Golder Associates Ltd. 929 McGill Rd, Kamloops, BC, V2C 6E9 

2 

Golder Associates Ltd. 220-1755 Springfield Road, Kelowna, BC, V1Y 5V5 

3 

Golder Associates Ltd. 201 Columbia Avenue, Castlegar, BC, V1N 1A8

Executive Summary 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 ii 


REVIEW 

The primary focus of the study is on the success of tributary enhancement in improving fish access and habitat; 

however, wildlife (including amphibians and birds) and habitat (vegetation) will also be monitored (a summary of 

objectives, management questions and hypotheses is found below in Table 1ES). Sites that BC Hydro selected 

for this monitoring program include two trial tributaries: Ole Creek - a woody debris blockage site (northern trial 

site), and Six Mile Creek - a perched mouth site (southern trial site). There are also paired control sites to both 

Ole and Six Mile which are, respectively, Factor Ross Creek (northern control) and Lamonti Creek (southern 

control). 

Baseline data were collected over three field sessions: 9 to 18 May, 6 to 8 June, and 8 to 18 August, 2011. Data 

collection involved fish spawning surveys, fish habitat assessment, fish population surveys, amphibian surveys, 

songbird surveys, and vegetation surveys along each tributary. Overall data collection went well during the 

spring and summer surveys in May and August; however, water levels during the June session were quite high 

and sampling was not possible at the northern study sites. 

Stream walks were conducted for each study creek to enumerate the number of spawners and redds. The 

locations of suitable spawning substrates observed during the surveys were recorded using a GPS. Fish 

spawning or evidence of fish spawning was not observed. Observations were made near the mouths of the study 

creeks to document any potential barriers to fish movement (i.e., debris jams or perched mouths). Backpack 

electrofishing was used to sample juvenile and small-bodied fish in the study creeks during the summer site visit 

(9 to 18 August, 2011). A multiple-pass removal-depletion survey with stratified sampling by habitat type was 

used to estimate the abundance of target and other species. Arctic Grayling were not caught or observed in any 

of the creeks. Fish species caught were Mountain Whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni), Bull Trout (Salvelinus 

confluentus), Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and Prickly Sculpin (Cottus asper). 

Amphibian field surveys were completed according to RIC standards (RIC 1998a and 1998b), using methods 

appropriate for the habitat type. Area-based surveys of small ponds and wetlands were completed while at each 

tributary, and time effort for each search was documented. Between all of the sites, the following four species 

were noted: Long-Toed Salamander (Ambystoma macrodactylum) (egg mass only), Wood Frog (Lithobates 

sylvatica), Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas), and Columbia Spotted Frog (Rana luteiventris). 

The survey methods for passerine bird species were adapted from the RIC Inventory Methods for Forest and 

Grassland Songbirds (1999) for variable radius point counts. A cumulative total of 70 bird species were detected 

during the field program including 37 species at Six Mile Creek, 21 at Lamonti Creek, 29 at Factor Ross Creek, 

and 12 at Ole Creek. 

Weather conditions were anomalous during spring and summer of 2011, with a late cool spring and 

subsequently late cool summer. Data analysis was quite limited for this first year of sampling, and changes will 

be made to the field sampling program (upon approval from BC Hydro) that are discussed in the 

Recommendations Section 5.0. Primary recommendations include: the installation in subsequent years of 

satellite enabled real-time water temperature data loggers, modification of the fish sampling program, 

discontinuation of bird surveys, suspension of the vegetation program until enhancement options are finalized, 

continuation of the amphibian surveys, and a recommendation for the addition of invertebrate sampling.

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 iii 


REVIEW 

Table 1 ES: GMSMON-17 Status of Objectives, Management Questions and Hypotheses after Year 1 

Objective Management Questions 

Address 

management 

questions by 

collecting 

data 

necessary to 

test null 

hypotheses. 

Does fish abundance and 

diversity in tributaries 

increase as a result of 

enhancement? 

Is the area and quality of fish 

habitat created by the 

tributary enhancement 

maintained over time? 

Does riparian vegetation 

along tributaries increase in 

abundance and diversity as a 

result of enhancement? 

Does amphibian abundance 

and diversity in tributaries 

change as a result of 

enhancement? 

Does tributary enhancement 

change the area and quality 

of amphibian breeding habitat 

over time? If so, is the area 

and quality maintained over 

time? 

Does abundance and 

diversity of songbirds 

(passerines) around 

tributaries change as a result 

of enhancement? 

Management Null 

Hypotheses 

Fish abundance and 

diversity in tributaries 

does not increase as a 

result of tributary 

enhancement. 

Total rearing area for 

fish does not increase 

following enhancement 

to tributaries. 

Riparian vegetation 

abundance and diversity 

in and near tributaries 

does not change 

following enhancement 

to tributaries. 

Amphibian abundance 

and diversity in and near 

tributaries does not 

change following 

tributary enhancement. 

Total amphibian 

breeding area does not 


enhancement. 

Songbird abundance 

and diversity near 

tributaries does not 


tributary enhancement. 

Year 1 (2011) Status 

Based on the limited baseline data 

available, hypothesis cannot be 

rejected at this time. More data 

required to be collected. 

Based on the limited baseline data 

available, hypothesis cannot be 



Vegetation transects were 

established and data were collected; 

however, BC Hydro has agreed that 

the vegetation program will be 

suspended until the year of the 

enhancement works. 

Based on only baseline data 

collected, hypothesis cannot be 



Because only baseline data has 

been collected to date, hypothesis 

cannot be rejected at this time. More 

data required to be collected. 

Recommend cancellation of bird 

sampling program. Should the 

proposed enhancement design call 

for removal of vegetated 

berms/delta's and the like, there 

could have been effects to 

vegetation and terrestrial habitat 

worth assessing in MON17. The 

WUP Committee would not have 

known what works would be needed 

to improve the tributary access 

enhancement, hence the inclusion of 

the songbird habitat portions of the 

monitor. Now that BCH has an 

implementation design showing that 

songbird habitat areas are not likely 

to require change, on a measureable 

scale, the recommendation is to 

state that H6 has been answered 

and does not require further study.

Keywords 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 iv 


REVIEW 

Williston Reservoir, Fish, Fish Spawning Habitat, Arctic Grayling, Rainbow Trout, Amphibian, Bird, Vegetation, 

Habitat

Acknowledgements 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 v 


REVIEW 

Golder acknowledges the following individuals for their insight, assistance, and local knowledge in the 

development of the work program, planning of field programs, and implementation of field programs. 

� 

� 

� 

� 

� 

� 

Tsay Keh Dene Nation – field assistant during spring survey (Luke Gleeson (coordinator), Charity Rivard 

(field technician). 

Vi Lambie – Mackenzie Nature Observatory for providing summary of bird species expected in area and 

updates on weather conditions and site access. 

Knut Herzog – Engineering Officer, Mackenzie District for providing details on road conditions / weather. 

Michael McArthur – BC Hydro for field visit audit and comments on methodology. 

Arne Langston – Williston Peace Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program for information related to fish 

and amphibian distributions and anticipated average spring reproduction timing. 

Dana Schmidt – Golder Associates Ltd. provided advice on sampling programs and potential statistical 

analyses.

Table of Contents 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 vi 


REVIEW 

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 

1.1 Scope, Objectives, Management Questions and Hypotheses ............................................................................. 2 

1.1.1 Fish Surveys .................................................................................................................................................. 3 

1.1.2 Amphibian Inventory and Abundance ............................................................................................................ 4 

1.1.3 Songbird Inventory and Abundance ............................................................................................................... 5 

1.1.4 Vegetation ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 

1.2 Study Area ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 

2.0 METHODS ........................................................................................................................................................................ 6 

2.1 Fish surveys......................................................................................................................................................... 6 

2.1.1 Spawner surveys............................................................................................................................................ 6 

2.1.2 Juvenile and Small-Bodied Fish Surveys ....................................................................................................... 7 

2.1.2.1 Sampling Sites ............................................................................................................................................ 7 

2.1.2.2 Multiple-removal depletion electrofishing surveys....................................................................................... 7 

2.1.3 Fish Data Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 10 

2.2 Amphibian Surveys ............................................................................................................................................ 10 

2.3 Bird Surveys ...................................................................................................................................................... 10 

2.4 Vegetation Surveys ............................................................................................................................................ 11 

3.0 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12 

3.1 Climate Data ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 

3.2 Fish surveys....................................................................................................................................................... 14 

3.2.1 Spawner surveys.......................................................................................................................................... 15 

3.2.1.1 First site visit (May 9 to 18, 2011) ............................................................................................................. 15 

3.2.1.2 Second site visit (7 to 8 June, 2011) ......................................................................................................... 15 

3.2.2 Juvenile and Small-Bodied Fish Surveys (8 to 18 August, 2011) ................................................................. 15 

3.2.2.1 Six Mile Creek........................................................................................................................................... 16 

3.2.2.2 Lamonti Creek .......................................................................................................................................... 16 

3.2.2.3 Factor Ross Creek .................................................................................................................................... 16 

3.2.2.4 Ole Creek ................................................................................................................................................. 16 

3.3 Amphibian Surveys ............................................................................................................................................ 17

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 vii 


REVIEW 

3.3.1 First site visit (9 to 18 May, 2011) ................................................................................................................ 17 

3.3.2 Second site visit (7 to 8 June, 2011) ............................................................................................................ 18 

3.3.3 Third site visit (8 to 18 August, 2011) ........................................................................................................... 18 

3.4 Bird Surveys ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 

3.5 Vegetation Surveys ............................................................................................................................................ 18 

3.5.1 Six Mile and Lamonti Creeks ....................................................................................................................... 19 

3.5.2 Factor Ross and Ole Creeks ........................................................................................................................ 20 

4.0 DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................................................................. 20 

4.1 Fish .................................................................................................................................................................... 20 

4.1.1 Spawner Surveys ......................................................................................................................................... 20 

4.1.2 Juvenile and Small-Bodied Fish Survey ....................................................................................................... 21 

4.2 Amphibians ........................................................................................................................................................ 22 

4.3 Birds .................................................................................................................................................................. 22 

4.4 Vegetation ......................................................................................................................................................... 22 

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 23 

6.0 CLOSURE ....................................................................................................................................................................... 25 

7.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................................ 26

TABLES 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 viii 


REVIEW 

Table 1: 2011 Field Program Summary...................................................................................................................................... 2 

Table 2: Approximate annual life history stages of selected species from McPhail (2007) ........................................................ 3 

Table 3: Amphibian Species Documented within the Study area (Hengeveld 1999, 2000). ....................................................... 4 

Table 4: Electrofisher Settings and Site Information for Mutiple-pass Removal Sampling. ........................................................ 9 

Table 5: Point Count Survey Dates. ......................................................................................................................................... 10 

Table 6: Snow Pillow Survey Locations and Relative Distances from Trial Tributary Locations. .............................................. 12 

Table 7: Summary of fish caught and observed, and CPUE during electrofishing surveys in Williston Reservoir 

tributary enhancement study creeks. ....................................................................................................................... 17 

Table 8: Amphibian Survey Time and Area Effort over May, June, and August 2011. ............................................................. 17 

FIGURES 

Figure 1: Ten Year Mean versus 2011 Snow Water Equivalent at the Aiken Snow Station. .................................................... 13 

Figure 2: Ten Year Mean versus 2011 Snow Water Equivalent at the Pine Pass Station. ....................................................... 13 

Figure 3: Reservoir Elevations for 2011, Vertical Lines Indicate Field Sessions ...................................................................... 14 

APPENDICES 

APPENDIX A 

Site Maps 

APPENDIX B 

Site Photos 

APPENDIX C 

Fish Collection and Wildlife Permit Documents 

APPENDIX D 

Summary Data Tables – Fish, Amphibian, Bird Surveys 

APPENDIX E 

Fish Field Data Forms 

APPENDIX F 

Fish Site Cards 

APPENDIX G 

Breeding Bird Point Count Forms 

APPENDIX H 

Vegetation Survey Forms 

APPENDIX I 

R Program Code

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 1 


REVIEW 

The Tributary Habitat Review monitoring program is a component of the Williston Tributary Access Management 

Plan aimed to improve access to tributaries for fish and wildlife. The Terms of Reference for the Peace River 

Water Use Monitoring Program (GMSMON17) discussed barriers to fish passage during spring spawning due to 

drawdown and interference from woody debris fields at the mouths of tributaries. Enhancement options to 

improve fish access up tributaries includes: removal of obstructions blocking fish access and preventing habitat 

destruction by mobile debris at each tributary mouth. The primary focus of the study is to measure the success 

of tributary enhancement in improving fish access and habitat; however, wildlife (including amphibians and birds) 

and habitat (vegetation) have also been monitored. 

Williston Reservoir is located next to and north of Mackenzie, in the northern interior of British Columbia (BC). It 

is the largest reservoir in BC, covering a surface area of 1,773 square kilometres (BC Hydro 2011). The Peace 

River is the primary outflow to the reservoir, with water levels in the reservoir controlled by the WAC Bennett 

Dam located near Hudson’s Hope, BC. Water fluctuations in the reservoir due to dam operations result in a large 

drawdown zone during low water periods. As a result, shallow channels with excessive braiding often occur 

where tributaries flow over the exposed drawdown zone (often hundreds of metres of muddy floodplain), 

potentially reducing fish access to the tributaries. Additionally, excessive large woody debris (LWD) present in 

the reservoir routinely accumulates in the bays where tributaries typically occur. Though unlikely to be an 

impediment to fish in itself, LWD exacerbates erosion increasing sedimentation and limiting plant establishment. 

Cubberley and Hengeveld (2010) conducted an aerial reconnaissance of nine tributaries in order to select the 

best candidates for a mitigation trial. Six Mile Creek (Six Mile) and Chichouyenily Creek were selected as the top 

candidates. However, since the submission of the report, Chichouyenily Creek was abandoned in favour of Ole 

Creek (Ole). 

Sites selected for this monitoring program include two trial tributaries: Ole Creek - a woody debris blockage site, 

and Six Mile Creek - a sediment perched mouth site. There are also paired control sites to both Ole and Six Mile 

creeks which are, Factor Ross Creek and Lamonti Creek, respectively. Ole Creek and Factor Ross Creek are 

located on the northwest shores of Williston Reservoir approximately 40 kilometres (km) south of the First Nation 

community of Tsay Keh Dene, and roughly 20 km apart. Six Mile and Lamonti creeks are located approximately 

35 km north of Mackenzie, are both within Six Mile Bay, and are roughly 1 km apart. 

Access to tributary streams for spring fish spawning is critical to tributary enhancement objectives. 

Large-bodied fish that spawn in Williston tributaries during the spring include Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus 

mykiss), Arctic Grayling (Thymallus arcticus), and suckers (Catostomus sp.) (A. Langston, pers. comm., 2011). 

According to Langston (2011), Grayling tend to spawn in large tributary streams and may have been absent from 

the trial tributaries for long enough that stocks may not exist. According to fish distribution records, Arctic 

Grayling have been recorded in Six Mile Creek (BC Ministry of Environment 2011 (FISS)). Based on habitat 

requirements and habitat available in the streams, Rainbow Trout along with suckers, are the most likely springspawning 

fish species to attempt to spawn in the trial tributaries (A. Langston, pers. comm., 2011). However, 

with enhanced spring access it is possible that Arctic Grayling could repopulate the tributary streams. A multiyear 

monitoring program would be necessary to test whether spawning utilization for either of the target species, 

grayling and Rainbow Trout, increases in the access-enhanced streams. Enhancement works are expected to 

improve fish access to tributaries via the removal of debris blockages and riparian species recruitment; the 

monitoring program will attempt to test these hypotheses. A modified summer fish sampling program is expected 

to be implemented during 2012 so that the next two years of pre-enhancement conditions can be captured, in

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 2 


REVIEW 

addition to the first year (2011). As enhanced fish access could have an influence on amphibians (i.e., via 

predation), the monitoring program also includes an amphibian monitoring component. Field activities for the 

2011 season are summarized in Table 1. 

As discussed in the Terms of Reference (TOR), information from this monitoring program will be used along with 

other monitoring projects to determine if changes to present operating elevations (e.g., lowering drawdown 

levels) would be beneficial for both fish and wildlife in Williston Reservoir (BC Hydro 2010). 

The primary objectives of this report are to: 

� 

� 

� 

address management questions identified in the “Scope and Objectives” Section 1.1; 

discuss findings of baseline data collection (2011) for fish, amphibian, bird and vegetation surveys; and, 

provide recommendations for future years of the monitoring program. 

Table 1: 2011 Field Program Summary. 

Period Field location Activity 

9 to 14 May 

14 to 18 May 

7 to 8 June 

8 to 12 Aug 

13 to 18 Aug 

Six Mile Creek, 

Lamonti Creek 

Ole Creek, 

Factor Ross Creek 


Lamonti Creek 


Lamonti Creek 

Ole Creek, 


fish habitat delineation, breeding bird point counts, time constrained 

amphibian searches, reconnaissance snorkel and angling fish 

surveys 

fish habitat delineation, breeding bird point counts, time constrained 

amphibian searches, reconnaissance snorkel and angling fish 

surveys 

breeding bird point counts, kick net sampling for fish eggs, fish 

spawning survey 

removal depletion fish surveys, vegetation monitoring, area constrain 

amphibian searches 

removal depletion fish surveys, vegetation monitoring, area constrain 

amphibian searches 

1.1 Scope, Objectives, Management Questions and Hypotheses 

According the BC Hydro TOR for GMSMON-17, the objective of the monitoring program is to address the 

management questions identified in the following sections. The study area will include the tributaries selected for 

enhancement (selected as part of Trial Tributaries implementation project). The monitoring program will occur 

annually during the 10-year Williston Tributary Access Management Plan. At least one year of baseline data will 

be collected prior to the commencement of any enhancement activities. Data collection, data analyses, and 

reporting will be completed annually over the study period and a final study report will be produced in Year 10 

that summarizes the results of the entire monitoring program and the conclusions that can be drawn pertaining to 

the management questions and hypotheses. According to the TOR, the general approach to the monitoring 

program is a before-after-impact study that will consist of annual fish surveys, fish habitat assessment, riparian 

vegetation assessment, songbird survey, as well as amphibian and amphibian-habitat inventory assessments.

1.1.1 Fish Surveys 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 3 


REVIEW 

Species deemed most suitable as receptors of the trial tributary enhancement monitoring program due to their 

social value, ecology, and life history characteristics include Arctic Grayling, Rainbow Trout, and Bull Trout 

(Salvelinus fontinalis). All of these species are expected to be, at least in part, adfluvial (i.e., migrate between 

river and lake habitats and spawn in rivers) within the Williston system. Further, Bull Trout are blue-listed in BC, 

a designation given to species considered to be particularly sensitive or vulnerable to human activities and 

stochastic events (BC CDC 2011). 

Table 2 shows the approximate life history stages of these species from McPhail (2007). 

Table 2: Approximate annual life history stages of selected species from McPhail (2007). 

Arctic Grayling most commonly display a riverine life history; however, adfluvial and lacustrine populations also 

occur. This species is known for complex migrations between spawning, feeding, and overwintering habitats. In 

the Williston Reservoir, Arctic Grayling are known to overwinter in embayments and migrate into streams shortly 

after ice-out for spawning. They typically spawn at water temperatures of approximately 4°C. Spawning sites are 

selected in flowing water over coarse (2 to 4 cm) gravel and cobble substrate, in modest current (0.5 to 1.0 m/s) 

in shallow (10 to 40 cm) glide or run habitat. Incubation is typically one to three weeks. Fry are weak swimmers 

and take refuge along the shallow margin of streams. (McPhail 2007) 

Bull Trout are typically adfluvial though resident stream populations are also known. They spawn in the fall at 

water temps below 10°C. In the upper Peace system, Bull Trout typically select spawning sites with large gravel 

substrate (~4 cm) in water 30 to 40 cm deep with a velocity of 0.2 to 0.6 m/s, usually in areas of groundwater 

upwelling. Incubation periods are temperature dependant and may range from approximately two to four months. 

Fry typically emerge in early June and may rear in the stream for two to four years. (McPhail 2007) 

Rainbow Trout are typically adfluvial, though a few introduced populations are known to spawn over gravel 

substrates along lake shores. Rainbow Trout spawn in the spring and migration into spawning stream is 

triggered by water temperatures (5°C) and rising water level. Spawning sites are typically selected over gravelly 

substrate in variable water depths (15 cm to 2.5 m is typical) with water velocities of 0.3 to 0.9 m/s. Areas with 

subgravel flow seem to be preferred. Incubation is temperature dependent and ranges from approximately 

two weeks to two months, alevins remain in the gravel and emerge 32 to 42 days after hatching. Fry of lacustrine 

populations may migrate back into the lake after their first summer or may overwinter in the stream and migrate 

the following spring. (McPhail 2007) 

The key management question relating to fisheries within the Tributary Habitat Review monitoring program is: 

does fish abundance and diversity in tributaries increase as a result of enhancement? Another key management 

question related to fish is: is the area and quality of fish habitat created by the tributary enhancement maintained 

over time? The primary sampling objective of the riparian vegetation task is to address the management 

question posed above by collecting data necessary to draw inferences and to test the following null hypotheses: 

� Ho: Fish abundance and diversity in tributaries does not increase as a result of tributary enhancement; and

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 4 


REVIEW 

� Ho: Total rearing area for fish does not increase following enhancement to tributaries. 

1.1.2 Amphibian Inventory and Abundance 

Amphibians in British Columbia can be grouped into aquatic breeding obligates (frogs, toads, newts and mole 

salamanders / Ambystomatidae) and terrestrial breeding obligates (lungless salamanders / Plethodontidae) 

(BC MWLAP, 2004a). Amphibian species occurring in the Project region consist of aquatic breeding obligates. 

Aquatic breeding amphibians require an aquatic environment such as ponds, streams, and wetlands for egg 

laying sites and tadpole rearing. In general, aquatic breeding amphibians select breeding sites that consist of 

standing or slow moving water (

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 5 


REVIEW 

The key management questions relating to the amphibian inventory and abundance section of the Tributary 

Habitat Review monitoring program are: 

1) Does amphibian abundance and diversity in tributaries change as a result of enhancement?; and, 

2) Does tributary enhancement change the area and quality of amphibian breeding habitat over time? If so, is 

the area and quality maintained over time? 

The primary sampling objective of the amphibian inventory and abundance task is to address the management 

questions posed above by collecting data for the study areas necessary to draw inferences and to test the 

following null hypothesis’ that: 

� Ho: Amphibian abundance and diversity in and near tributaries does not change following tributary 

enhancement; and, 

� Ho: Total amphibian breeding area does not change following enhancement. 

1.1.3 Songbird Inventory and Abundance 

Waterfowl and bird of prey monitoring was conducted in the reservoir during 2000 and 2003 (Booth and 

Corbould 2003, Corbould and Hengeveld 2000, respectively). The breeding period for passerines (songbirds) is 

thought to be from May to July in the area surrounding the Williston Reservoir (RIC 1999). Due to the fact that 

there have been limited surveys of songbirds in the Williston Reservoir area, the Tributary Monitoring Program of 

selected tributaries aimed to complete reconnaissance surveys for songbirds to provide baseline information to 

test whether proposed enhancement works would affect songbird abundance and diversity. 

The key management question relating to the songbird inventory and abundance portion of the tributary habitat 

review monitoring program is: does abundance and diversity of songbirds (passerines) around tributaries change 

as a result of enhancement? The primary sampling objective of the songbird inventory and abundance task is to 

address the management question posed above by collecting data necessary to draw inferences and to test the 

following null hypothesis: 

� Ho: Songbird abundance and diversity near tributaries does not change following tributary enhancement. 

1.1.4 Vegetation 

The key management question relating to the riparian vegetation section of the Tributary Habitat Review 

monitoring program is: does riparian vegetation along tributaries increase in abundance and diversity as a result 

of enhancement? The primary sampling objective of the riparian vegetation task is to address the management 

question posed above by collecting data necessary to draw inferences and to test the following null hypothesis: 

� Ho: Riparian vegetation abundance and diversity in and near tributaries does not change following 

enhancement to tributaries.

1.2 Study Area 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 6 


REVIEW 

The 2011 sampling program focused on the lower reaches of each tributary where each creek flows into 

Williston Reservoir and upstream approximately 1.1 km, typically to where the nearest Forest Service Road 

crossed each creek. A summary map showing the location of each site (Map 1) and sampling plots (Maps 2 to 5) 

are provided in Appendix A and photos of the tributary mouths are shown in Appendix B. 

Descriptions of the Site’s biological environment are based on the Ecoregion system and Biogeoclimatic (BGC) 

Ecosystem Classification (BEC) system. The Ecoregion classification system provides a systematic review of 

the small-scale ecological relationships in the province; the Site is located in the Humid Temperate Ecodomain, 

Humid Continental Highlands Ecodivision, Sub-boreal Interior Ecoprovince, Omineca Mountains Ecoregion and 

Parsnip Trench Ecosection. The BEC system delineates the province into BGC zones based on topographic and 

climatic conditions that are reflected by the presence of specific plant and animal communities. Based on 

mapping provided on the iMap BC (Government of BC 2009), the Site occurs within the Williston Sub-Boreal 

Spruce moist cool biogeoclimatic unit (SBSmk2). 

2.0 METHODS 

2.1 Fish surveys 

2.1.1 Spawner surveys 

Stream walks were conducted for each study creek to enumerate the number of spawners and redds. One 

person walked up each stream bank starting at the outlet. All habitat types were assessed for fish presence and 

for evidence of spawning (i.e., cleared gravel patches). Effort was dependant on ease of access and habitat 

suitability. For example, where stream banks were difficult to traverse, surveyors would concentrate their effort to 

point features such as riffles and gravel substrate areas. Stream walks were conducted to target potential Arctic 

Grayling spawning at all four study creeks during the first field site visit (9 to 18 May, 2011) and on Six Mile and 

Lamonti creeks during the second site visit (6 to 8 June, 2011). The second visit was timed to target potential 

Rainbow Trout spawning. High flow conditions in the study streams during the second visit prevented stream 

walk surveys on Ole and Factor Ross creeks. 

The locations of suitable spawning substrates observed during the surveys were recorded using a GPS. 

Observations were made near the mouths of the study creeks to document any potential barriers to fish 

movement (i.e., debris jams or perched mouths). 

In addition to visual surveys for redds and spawners during stream walks, a number of other techniques were 

attempted to assess the suitability of these methods for detecting spawning activity in the study creeks. In 

reaches suitable for spawning, fly-fishing was used to attempt to capture spawning adults and kick-net sampling 

was used to sample gravels for eggs. Fly fishing was conducted in Lamonti and Six Mile creeks during the Arctic 

Grayling survey. Effort was concentrated on pools of adequate size that they might contain adult fish. A total of 

two to five minutes were spent angling with dry flies in each selected pool. Some snorkelling was also conducted 

to look for spawners and redds but efforts were limited because of high flow conditions. Only Six Mile Creek 

contained adequate habitat in which to conduct snorkel surveys during early spring but Lamonti Creek was also 

sampled. An average of five minutes were spent surveying each pool in Six Mile Creek while less time (average 

of two minutes) was spent in each Lamonti Creek pool due to the small pool sizes. Given the low success rate

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 7 


REVIEW 

and increased water flows by the time the crews reached the northern tributaries, Ole and Factor Ross creeks 

were not angled or snorkelled. 

2.1.2 Juvenile and Small-Bodied Fish Surveys 

Backpack electrofishing was used to sample juvenile and small-bodied fishes in the study creeks during the 

summer site visit (9 to 18 August, 2011). A multiple-pass removal-depletion survey with stratified sampling by 

habitat type was used to estimate the abundance of target and other species. A fish collection permit was 

obtained from the Ministry of Natural Resource Operations (Permit # PG11-70349) and a copy is found in 

Appendix C. Fish species identifications were determined by experienced field staff and confirmed by reference 

to photographs and to McPhail (2007). 

2.1.2.1 Sampling Sites 

Electrofishing sites were 100 m long and 2 to 3 sites were sampled in each creek. Sites were randomly selected 

from the first 1.1 km of stream from the mouth because this zone is most likely to be influenced by enhancement 

and site access to upper reaches of the streams was difficult. Random selection of sampling sites was 

conducted using Generalized Random Tessellation Stratified (GRTS) survey design protocol as suggested by 

Stevens and Olsen (2004). This method provides a compromise between purely stratified design and complete 

randomness, and results in randomly selected sites that are spread out across the zone of interest. It also allows 

the additional of random sites if originally selected sites cannot be sampled for some reason (e.g., not feasible to 

access site). The R program language module and details in the methodology can be found at: 

http://www.epa.gov/nheerl/arm/designing/design_intro.htm., and is provided in Appendix I. 

Habitat units (strata) within each sampling site were classified as one of the following categories: glide, pool, 

riffle, or rapid. The length of the site along the thalweg and the mean width was measured using a measuring 

tape or hip-chain. Approximate stream flow conditions in relation to the channel width and bankfull depth were 

classified as low, medium or high. A Reconnaissance Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory Site Card were also 

completed for each electrofishing site. 

2.1.2.2 Multiple-removal depletion electrofishing surveys 

Once a suitable sample site was selected (at the downstream end), the upstream block net location was 

measured with a hip chain. It was placed 100 m upstream, or at the closest suitable location. The site length was 

then recorded on the form. A site card was completed at each site to provide detailed habitat information. The 

sampled area was then calculated by multiplying the average channel width by the distance between the block 

nets. 

Sample sites were isolated using block nets installed across the channel at the upstream and downstream end 

of the site, preventing fish from entering or leaving the site during sampling. Block nets were installed using rebar 

pounded into the substrate and rope attached to shore; small rocks and boulders were used to secure the net to 

the creek bottom. Backpack electrofishing was conducted using a Smith-Root LR-24 backpack electrofisher with 

a programmable output wave form that enables fish to be caught efficiently with minimal risk of injury. The 

sampling crew consisted of two to three members, with one person operating the electrofishing unit and one or

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 8 


REVIEW 

two people netting fish. Sampling crews were consistent for all removal passes at each site to keep capture 

efficiency consistent between passes. Each site was sampled from downstream to upstream. Captured fish were 

transferred to buckets set along the side of the sample reach. Fish observed but not captured were recorded, 

including the species and estimated length when possible. Sampling effort (i.e., seconds of electrofisher 

operation) was recorded during each removal pass. All captured fish were enumerated, identified to species, 

measured for fork length (to the nearest 1 mm) and weighed (to the nearest 1 g). Scale samples were collected 

from salmonid species and stored in scale envelopes. After processing fish from the first electrofishing pass, a 

second pass was conducted in the same manner. Because of low catch rates of fish in the study sites, only 

two electrofishing passes were conducted at most sites, with only one pass at sites with no fish or very few fish 

captured (see Results Section 3.0). After all electrofishing passes were completed, fish were released back into 

the creek within the sample site. 

Table 4 provides detailed information on the sample sites, site conditions, sampling effort, and electrofisher 

settings used during the sampling. Maps 2 to 5 in Appendix A show the location of the block nets in each of the 

sampled tributaries.

GMSMON-17 WILLISTON RESERVOIR TRIBUTARY HABITAT REVIEW 

Table 4: Electrofisher Settings and Site Information for Mutiple-pass Removal Sampling. 

Creek Site Date 

Six Mile 

Lamonti 

Factor Ross 

Ole 

Sampled 

Area 

(m 2 ) 

EF 

Pass 

Time 

Start Finish 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 9 

EF Effort 

(seconds) 

Frequency 

(Hz) 

Electrofisher Settings 

Duty 

Cycle (%) 

Voltage 

(V) 

Temperature 

SM1 10-Aug 1758 1 16:30 17:00 479 60 36% 200 12.0 

SM2 9-Aug 1750 1 16:27 17:00 769 60 36% 300 12.0 

SM2 9-Aug 1750 2 17:15 17:45 580 60 36% 300 12.0 

SM3 10-Aug 1520 1 11:20 11:50 491 60 36% 200 9.0 

SM3 10-Aug 1520 2 12:04 14:05 478 60 36% 200 9.0 

LAM 12-Aug 1225 1 9:00 9:25 n/a 60 36% 300 6.5 

1 

LAM 12-Aug 1225 2 9:45 10:09 349 60 36% 300 6.5 

1 

LAM 11-Aug 1050 1 10:55 11:28 446 60 36% 200 8.0 

2 

LAM 11-Aug 1050 2 11:50 12:29 408 60 36% 200 8.0 

2 

LAM 11-Aug 1810 1 14:25 14:55 n/a 60 36% 200 9.0 

1 

FR4 15-Aug 1518 1 13:50 14:20 672 70 28% 200 7.0 

FR4 15-Aug 1518 2 14:30 14:55 546 70 28% 200 7.0 

FR1o 14-Aug 

1012 

1012 1 12:02 12:30 622 60 36% 200 7.0 

FR1o 

14-Aug 1012 2 13:10 13:45 537 60 36% 200 7.0 

OLE1 17-Aug 750 1 11:13 11:45 544 50 20% 400 6.0 




(°C)

2.1.3 Fish Data Analysis 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 10 


REVIEW 

Analysis of spawner survey data was simply counts of redds or spawners by site or habitat type. 

A hierarchical Bayesian model with habitat strata was proposed in order to estimate abundance of the most 

common species from the multiple-pass removal-depletion electrofishing survey. However, very small catches of 

all species during the surveys made the proposed analysis and abundance estimates unfeasible. The very low 

numbers of fish also did not warrant analyses of life-history characteristics (e.g., length-weight relationships). 

Therefore, analysis of electrofishing survey data consisted simply of descriptive summaries of counts of fish 

caught by site and creek. Catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE), measured in number of fish per metre of stream length 

sampled, was calculated for each creek, combining all sample sites. 

2.2 Amphibian Surveys 

The amphibian field surveys were completed according to RIC standards (RIC 1998a and 1998b), where 

appropriate. Area-based surveys of small ponds and wetlands were completed while at each tributary, and time 

effort for each search was documented. Data collected included encounters with amphibian egg masses, larvae 

and metamorphs (sub-adults and adults). Data recorded included species identification, sex (where feasible), 

developmental stage, and snout-vent length (SVL) (adults only). Identification keys in Corkran and Thoms (1996) 

were used to verify identification of egg masses and larvae encountered in the field. Encounters were georeferenced 

and photo-documented. A wildlife permit was applied for through the Ministry of Natural Resource 

Operations under the Wildlife Act of British Columbia and a permit was obtained on 7 July, 2011 (Permit #PG11- 

70683) (copy found in Appendix C). 

2.3 Bird Surveys 

The survey methods for passerine bird species were adapted from the RIC Inventory Methods for Forest and 

Grassland Songbirds (1999) for variable radius point counts. Each creek was used as a transect as it should 

reasonably bisect the target habitat (i.e., riparian area) as suggested by Huff et al. (2000) in dealing with the 

unique challenges of sampling riparian areas. Point count survey locations were established at 200 m intervals 

along the stream with the first location chosen within what is anticipated to be the treatment area. Survey dates 

are provided in Table 5. 

Table 5: Point Count Survey Dates. 

Location Stations Sampled Time Round Date 

Six Mile SMPC 1-5 AM 1 05-May-11 

Six Mile SMPC 1-5 AM 2 13-May-11 

Six Mile SMPC 1-5 AM 3 08-June-11 

Lamonti LPC 1-5 AM 1 11-May-11 

Lamonti LPC 1-5 AM 2 13-May-11 

Lamonti LPC 1-5 AM 3 07-June-11 

Factor Ross FRPC 1-6 AM 1 15-May-11 

Factor Ross FRPC 1-6 PM 2 15-May-11 

Factor Ross FRPC 1-2 PM 3 17-May-11 

Ole OPC 1-8 AM 1 16-May-11

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 11 


REVIEW 

Bird surveys were conducted using variable radius point counts for songbirds along riparian areas of test and 

control streams in order to estimate diversity and abundance of songbird species assemblages before and after 

treatment. If stream noise interfered with audio detection of calls, then one side was chosen and surveys were 

conducted a short distance from the stream. Surveys were conducted between sunrise and 10 am; however, if 

weather was overcast and activity did not notably decrease, surveys were extended beyond this time. Surveys 

were conducted during suitable weather conditions, where possible, according to RIC 1999 standards. 

Once a location was selected, the surveyor waited in silence for one full minute for activity to resume 

(i.e., minimize the effect of the observer). This time was used to record the field UTMs, mark a waypoint, flag and 

label the plot, and record weather, time, and habitat information on the field form. A north arrow was marked on 

the form and any other notable features (i.e., the stream) of the site were recorded. 

All observations and calls were recording during a full five minute period (using the RIC nomenclature for 

recording position, movement, level of certainty, etc. on the form). All bird observations were recorded (inside or 

outside of the plot) on the form relative to the observer. Observations made between three to five minutes were 

also noted. A number of field guides were employed in order to verify observations and calls including the Field 

Guide to the Birds of North America (National Geographic 1999) as well as Sibley Bird and iBird Pro applications 

for iTouch and iPhone which provide excellent libraries of bird songs which can be referenced in the field. If a 

song could not be identified quickly in the field it was recorded with a Zoon H2 handheld recording device and 

then compared to available song libraries later for identification. 

Where observations of red or blue listed (or otherwise known listed) passerines were noted during the field visits 

to the Williston Reservoir study areas, a Ground Inspection Form (BC Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks 

and BC Ministry of Forests 1998) was completed to record habitat attributes where the species was noted. 

Observations were then provided to the BC Conservation Data Centre (BC CDC). 

2.4 Vegetation Surveys 

Vegetation surveys were conducted over the period of 8 to 12 August, 2011 at Six Mile and Lamonti tributaries, 

and during the 13 to 18 August, 2011 at Factor Ross and Ole creeks. Paired permanent 15 m (slope distance) 

line intersect transects were established at each of the 4 tributaries starting from where the creek flowed into the 

reservoir on either side of the creek and then moving upstream approximately 150 m to establish two more 

vegetation transects on either side of the bank. General characteristics recorded at the beginning of vegetation 

transects included: bank characteristics (shape, slope, and stability), overall riparian cover, extent of canopy over 

the channel, debris cover (CWD), and any other notable vegetation features adjacent to the creek. Transect 

locations at each tributary are provided in Maps 2 to 5 of Appendix A. 

Permanent line intersect transects were set up perpendicular to the stream. Starting locations were determined 

to be as close as possible to where the creek entered the reservoir. Once a location was identified, a piece of 

rebar was placed at the high water mark (top of bank). The location was georeferenced with a Trimble ProXH 

GPS and marked with flagging tape. A measuring tape was connected to the stake and laid from the high water 

mark and another piece of rebar was pounded in at the end of a 15 m transect. The end of each transect was 

marked in the same manner as the start. Rebar was left in place with the ends painted so that they can be used 

for future measurements. All vegetation species that intercepted the vertical plane of the transect line were 

identified and measured. Forbs and bryophytes were measured at ground level, while shrubs and trees were

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 12 


REVIEW 

measured as the length of canopy that intercepted the line (Canfield 1941). Efforts were made not to disturb 

each transect by walking and samples of unknown species were collected away from the transect for future 

identification. 

In addition to line-intersect transects, a 5 x 5 metre quadrat was set up at the starting point of each transect 

parallel to the stream, and all trees whose stems were more than 50% within the quadrat were counted. A 5 m 

pole was used to establish the plot boundary. Trees were marked with tree tags placed low on the bole and 

positioned towards the centre of the plot. Tree heights were visually estimated and diameter at breast height 

(DBH) was measured for all trees determined to be within the quadrat. Trees were placed into one of four tree 

layers, defined as follows: Layer 1: great than 12.5 cm diameter at breast height (DBH = 1.3 m), Layer 2: 

7.5 to 12.5 cm DBH, Layer 3: 1.3 m tall to 7.5 cm DBH, and Layer 4: up to 1.3 m tall. 

A photo reference location was also established, placed 2.5 m from the start of the line-intersect transect, to 

visually capture both the line-intersect transect and the tree quadrat. Photos were taken, using a Pentax Optio 

W8 camera, upstream (through the tree quadrat), perpendicular to the stream (along the line-intersect), 

downstream, and across the stream. The azimuth and height of the camera for each photo was recorded and a 

surveyor’s pole was used to ensure consistency. 

3.0 RESULTS 

3.1 Climate Data 

Snow packs for the 2011 study year are compared with historical means from two locations which are assumed 

to most closely resemble conditions at the study sites: Aiken Lake (Station ID: 4A309) for the northern locations 

and Pine Pass (Station ID: 4OA2P) for the southern. Table 6 provides the details of these survey stations. 

Table 6: Snow Pillow Survey Locations and Relative Distances from Trial Tributary Locations. 

Station ID Northings Eastings Elevation 

Distance from Trial 

Tributary 

Aiken Lake (4A30P) 6276204 332204 1040 

Pine Pass (4A02P) 6133801 523251 1400 

~95 km Northwest 

of Factor Ross 

~45 km Southwest 

of Six Mile Bay 

The mean Snow Water Equivalent (SWE) of the previous 10 years is compared to the 2011 season in Figures 1 

and 2.

Snow Water Equivalent (mm) 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 13 


REVIEW 

2011 

2001-2010 Mean 

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 

Figure 1: Ten Year Mean versus 2011 Snow Water Equivalent at the Aiken Snow Station. 

Snow Water Equivalent (mm) 

1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

2011 

2001-2010 Mean 


Figure 2: Ten Year Mean versus 2011 Snow Water Equivalent at the Pine Pass Station.

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 14 


REVIEW 

This analysis suggests that snowpacks were above average within the trial tributary catchment areas, 

particularly at the southern sites. This snowpack is likely to have contributed to above average spring discharge 

and cooler water temperatures. 

Further analysis of regional stream discharge was attempted by comparing the hydrometric curve of the Nation 

River from 2011 with the mean from the previous 10 years. The Nation River is a large tributary of the Williston 

Reservoir located on the southwest side, approximately half way between the northern and southern trial 

tributary locations. Environment Canada maintains a water survey station (ID 07ED003) near the mouth of this 

river. It was assumed that discharge curves at this location would be somewhat representative of regional 

conditions. However, analysis of these data showed that the 2011 discharge was below average, which conflicts 

with what was observed in the field, particularly at the southern sites. It may be that the characteristics of the 

catchment area (i.e., size, slope, location) are not representative. 

Figure 3 provides the Williston Reservoir lake elevations during 2011; the vertical lines indicate the field 

sessions. Note that the field sessions corresponded well with the low, rising, and high water periods. 

Resevoir Elevation (masl) 

674 

672 

670 

668 

666 

664 

662 

660 

658 

656 

654 


Figure 3: Reservoir Elevations for 2011, Vertical Lines Indicate Field Sessions. 

3.2 Fish surveys 

Fish habitat evaluations were based on a modification of Level 1 Fish Habitat Assessment Procedures (FHAP). 

Instead of stream reach assessments based on stream classification, data were collected specific to sample 

sites selected for electrofishing sampling surveys conducted during the summer survey. Due to hazardous 

stream conditions during spring surveys at some of the sites, data were not collected consistently between sites. 

Consequently, data are not presented here. Instead, FHAP cards will be filled out during the 2012 sampling 

sessions and results presented in the 2013 report.

3.2.1 Spawner surveys 

3.2.1.1 First site visit (9 to 18 May, 2011) 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 15 


REVIEW 

The timing of this field session corresponded closely with the timing of the lowest elevation of the reservoir 

(Figure 3); therefore, impediments to fish movement into the tributaries should have been evident; however, 

none were noted at any of the trial tributary locations. Six Mile and Lamonti creeks did display some braiding of 

the channel across the drawdown zone (particularly at Six Mile Creek); however, there was no apparent barrier 

to upstream fish passage. Factor Ross Creek did not have large woody debris (LWD) blockage at its mouth, 

contrary to what was expected, though some LWD was present in the vicinity which may have contributed to 

blockages in the past. Ole Creek did have a large accumulation of LWD at the mouth but fish passage through 

the accumulation seemed likely (see Photographs 14, 16, and 18 in Appendix B). Although water levels in the 

streams appeared to be relatively low during the survey period (with the exception of Factor Ross and Ole 

creeks during the end of the survey when water levels were on the rise), each creek appeared to provide 

adequate depths and velocities for passage of fish species such as Arctic Grayling, Rainbow Trout, and suckers. 

Rainy weather on the large snow pack may have resulted in higher than average water levels in the creeks 

during early spring 2011 but there were no signs of recent high flow events that would have flushed out debris at 

the creek mouths. Freshet conditions were not experienced during the survey, although creek flows were 

increasing by 17 May, when crews were departing the site. 

Fish were not observed or captured in any of the four streams during May. Potential spawning habitat was 

mapped with a GPS. Water temperatures ranged between 0 and 3.5°C (see Table 1, Appendix D). 

3.2.1.2 Second site visit (7 to 8 June, 2011) 

Fish were not observed in either of the 2 visited streams (Six Mile and Lamonti). Potential spawning habitat that 

was mapped with a GPS during the first survey was visited and a kick net was deployed to sample for fish eggs. 

Six kick net samples were collected in Lamonti where suitable spawning gravels were noted, and 2 were 

conducted in Six Mile Creek as high water and velocity precluded safe execution of additional sampling in this 

stream. Eggs were not found. Water temperatures were between 3 and 5°C, below the optimum range for 

Rainbow Trout but within the optimum range for Arctic Grayling (although late in the spring) (McPhail 2009). 

There did not appear to be any impediments to fish passage up Six Mile and Lamonti creeks. Water levels in the 

streams appeared to be relatively high during the survey period. Each creek appeared to provide adequate 

depths and velocities for passage of fish species such as Arctic Grayling, Rainbow Trout, and suckers. Rainy 

weather on the large snow pack may have resulted in higher than average water levels in the creeks during late 

spring 2011. Near freshet conditions were experienced during the survey but water temperatures were still quite 

low. 

3.2.2 Juvenile and Small-Bodied Fish Surveys (8 to 18 August, 2011) 

Water temperatures in the creeks ranged from 6 to 12°C at the time of sampling (Table 1, Appendix D). Flows 

were categorized as medium for all creeks. Catch rates of fish by electrofishing in all four study creeks were 

generally characterized by low species diversity and small numbers of fish (Tables 2 and 3, Appendix D). 

Rainbow Trout were caught and observed in Six Mile and Lamonti creeks but not in Ole or Factor Ross creeks. 

Arctic Grayling were not caught or observed in any of the creeks. Other fish species caught were Mountain

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 16 


REVIEW 

Whitefish, Bull Trout, and Prickly Sculpin (Cottus asper). The low numbers of fish caught, especially for target 

species, did not permit estimation of abundance based on the depletion between electrofishing passes using the 

proposed analysis. Similarly, the low numbers of fish did not warrant detailed analyses of life-history 

characteristics (e.g., length-weight relationships). 

The numbers of fish caught in each electrofishing pass and the lengths and weights of all fish caught by 

electrofishing pass, habitat type, and sampling site are provided in Table 3, Appendix D. 

3.2.2.1 Six Mile Creek 

Three sites were sampled on Six Mile Creek. In total, 2 Prickly Sculpin and 1 Mountain Whitefish were caught. 

Four Rainbow Trout and one unidentified fish were also observed. The sites consisted mostly of swift and 

shallow riffle habitats. 

3.2.2.2 Lamonti Creek 

Three sites were sampled on Lamonti Creek. In total, 4 Rainbow Trout, 2 Mountain Whitefish, and 1 Prickly 

Sculpin were caught. In addition, 1 Rainbow Trout and 2 sculpin sp. were observed but not caught. Habitat was 

mostly riffles with some pools associated with large woody debris and log jams. 

3.2.2.3 Factor Ross Creek 

Two sites were sampled on Factor Ross Creek. In total, 10 Mountain Whitefish and 1 sculpin sp. were caught. In 

addition, 5 Mountain Whitefish and 2 sculpin sp. were observed but not caught. 

3.2.2.4 Ole Creek 

Two sites were sampled on Ole Creek. In total, 5 Mountain Whitefish and 3 Bull Trout were caught. 

Three Mountain Whitefish, 1 sculpin sp. and 1 trout sp. were observed but not caught. In addition, 3 large 

(300 to 400 mm) Bull Trout were observed approximately 5 m upstream of the upstream end of one of the sites 

(OLE1), holding in the current near the bank. One of the Bull Trout was captured by dip net and appeared to be 

in good condition. It is assumed that these fish were moving downstream and encountered the fence. 

A summary of fish caught and observed along with the catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) while electrofishing at each 

tributary is presented below in Table 7 (removal and depletion data cards found in Appendix E and copies of site 

cards are found in Appendix F).

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 17 


REVIEW 

Table 7: Summary of fish caught and observed, and CPUE during electrofishing surveys in Williston 

Reservoir tributary enhancement study creeks. 

Creek Species 

# 

Caught 

# 

Observed Total 

Length of all sites 

combined (m) 

CPUE 

(fish/km) 

Ole Bull Trout 3 3* 6 206 29 

Ole Mountain Whitefish 5 3 8 206 39 

Ole Sculpin sp. 0 1 1 206 5 

Ole Trout sp. 0 1 1 206 5 

Factor Ross Mountain Whitefish 10 5 15 225 67 

Factor Ross Sculpin sp. 1 2 3 225 13 

Lamonti Mountain Whitefish 2 0 2 331 6 

Lamonti Rainbow Trout 4 1 5 331 15 

Lamonti Sculpin sp. 1 2 3 331 9 

Six Mile Mountain Whitefish 1 0 1 300 3 

Six Mile Rainbow Trout 0 4 4 300 13 

Six Mile Prickly Sculpin 2 0 2 300 7 

*Three large (300 to 400 mm) Bull Trout observed ~5 m upstream of upstream block net after an electrofishing pass. 

3.3 Amphibian Surveys 

Amphibian surveys were completed during all three visits to the tributaries in May, June, and August 2011. 

Total effort and area sampled at each tributary is summarized in Table 8. Data are summarized in Appendix D. 

Table 8: Amphibian Survey Time and Area Effort over May, June, and August 2011. 

Site Area (m²) Time (min) 

Six Mile Creek 7700 395 

Lamonti Creek 3200 210 

Factor Ross Creek 3800 200 

Ole Creek 1300 150 

3.3.1 First site visit (9 to 18 May, 2011) 

Amphibian activity was relatively limited during this first field session, especially at Six Mile and Lamonti creeks, 

the southern tributaries. Time-constrained surveys of key wetland habitat surrounding all four tributaries were 

completed during this first field session. The only observed amphibian presence at the southern sites was found 

in a small wetland adjacent to Six Mile Creek. A Long-Toed Salamander egg mass was located approximately 

3 cm deep attached to a stump root; the wetland water temperature was 12º C (air temperature ~ 6º C). As the 

weather improved for work at Ole and Factor Ross creeks (northern tributaries), and air temperatures increased 

(up to 27º C on 16 May, 2011) amphibian activity also appeared to increase. An adult Western Toad was spotted 

emerging from a root-wad on a fallen tree along Factor Ross Creek. Ole Creek also had many juvenile Western 

toads in the shrubby wetland area at the mouth where the creek flows out into the Williston Reservoir. On the

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 18 


REVIEW 

afternoon of 23 May at the bridge crossing upstream on Ole Creek, a Wood Frog was heard calling and a Wood 

Frog egg mass was encountered; the wetland water temperature was 20º C. 

3.3.2 Second site visit (7 to 8 June, 2011) 

Amphibian activity was relatively limited during this field session. Time-constrained surveys of key wetland 

habitat surrounding the two visited tributaries were completed. The only observed amphibian presence at the 

southern tributaries was an adult western toad found in a small wetland adjacent to Six Mile Creek. The water 

temperature in this wetland was 8°C. Northern tributaries were not visited during this field session. 

3.3.3 Third site visit (8 to 18 August, 2011) 

Golder completed two more time-constrained surveys at Six Mile and Lamonti creeks and one each at Ole and 

Factor Ross creeks. Columbia spotted frogs and wood frogs were noted at Six Mile Creek and western toads at 

Lamonti Creek. Amphibians were not noted during this sampling session at Ole or Factor Ross creeks; however, 

an incidental adult Western toad was noted in the forest on the walk out to the road from Ole Creek. 

A full summary of amphibian findings is found in Table 4 in Appendix D. 

3.4 Bird Surveys 

A total of 70 species were detected during the field program including 37 species at Six Mile Creek, 21 at 

Lamonti Creek, 29 at Factor Ross Creek, and 12 at Ole Creek. These are provided in Table 5, Appendix D. No 

species at risk were observed during the surveys; however, incidental observations of two provincially blue listed 

species were made in the vicinity of Factor Ross and Ole creeks: a Broad-Winged Hawk (Buteo platypterus) 

near Ole Creek and Surf Scoters (Melanitta perspicillata) on a small pond between Factor Ross and Ole creeks. 

Other notable observations include a Red-Throated Loon (Gavia stellata) in the Factor Ross inlet and a female 

Harlequin Duck (Histrionicus histrionicus) on Six-Mile Creek. Yellow-Rumped Warbler (Dendroica coronate), 

Pacific Wren (Troglodytes troglodytes), Golden-crowned Kinglet (Regulus satrapa), and Wilson’s Warbler 

(Wilsonia pusilla) were among the most commonly observed species. As this component of the monitoring 

program is expected to be discontinued in future years (discussed below), calculation for estimating relative 

abundance were not conducted. Copies of all point count data forms are provided in Appendix G. 

3.5 Vegetation Surveys 

All lower portions of the four tributaries of interest are within the SBSmk2 biogeoclimatic unit. The SBSmk2 

occurs around the lower shores of Williston Reservoir from south at MacKenzie north to Ingenika Arm 

(MacKinnon et al 1990). This BGC unit lies below the SBSwk2 (Williston Sub-Boreal Spruce wet cool unit) and 

the ESSFwk2 (Williston Englemann Spruce Subalpine Fir wet cool unit) in the south and the ESSFmv3 

(Omineca Englemann Spruce Subalpine Fir moist very cold unit) in the north. As the SBSmk2 BGC unit is 

located within the rainshadow of the Omineca Mountains, it is the driest of the SBS units.

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 19 


REVIEW 

In general, natural areas within the SBSmk2 are characterized by climax forests of hybrid white spruce (Picea 

glauca x engelmannii) with lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) found on drier sites and sub-alpine fir 

(Abies lasiocarpa) typically found in wetter areas (MacKinnon et al. 1990). Medium moisture and nutrient (zonal) 

sites are typically characterized by an understory dominated by a mixture of shrubs including: highbush 

cranberry (Viburnum edule), prickly rose (Rosa acicularis), black twinberry (Lonicera involucrata), black 

huckleberry (Vaccinium membranaceum), Sitka alder (Alnus viridis ssp. sinuata) and thimbleberry (Rubus 

parviflorus). The herb layer is diverse and includes bunchberry (Cornus canadensis), palmate coltsfoot 

(Petasites palmatus), twinflower (Linnaea borealis), trailing raspberry (Rubus pubescens), false Solomon’s seal 

(Smilacina racemosa) and an extensive moss layer dominated by red-stemmed feathermoss (Pleurozium 

schreberi), knight’s plume (Ptilium crista-castrensis), and step moss (Hylocomium splendens). Riparian areas 

typical of the SBSmk2 are characterized by stands of hybrid white spruce, subalpine fir and lodgepole pine with 

an understory of devil’s club (Oplopanax horridus), black gooseberry (Ribes lacustre) and horsetail species 

(Equisetum sp.) (MacKinnon et al. 1990). 

The primary site series located in the riparian areas of each tributary are 05 (Hybrid white spruce (Sxw) – Oak 

Fern), and 06 (Hybrid white spruce (Sxw) – Horsetail)). The 06 site series is typically found on fluvial floodplain 

areas and was noted in the area immediately adjacent to each tributary, whereas the 05 site series was typically 

located slightly farther from each tributary at the toe of a slope but that is influenced by the water table. 

Ole Creek had extensive areas of 05 site series adjacent to the creek and devil’s club was quite prevalent. 

3.5.1 Six Mile and Lamonti Creeks 

Four transects were established at both Six Mile and Lamonti creeks and consisted of transects SV1-SV4 and 

LV1-LV4, respectively. Data cards are found in Appendix E. Vegetation surrounding the mouths of each creek 

included a mixture of shrub-layer black cottonwood (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa), Sitka willow (Salix 

sitchensis), MacKenzie’s willow (Salix prolixa), mountain alder (Alnus tenuifolia), black twinberry, trapper’s tea 

(Ledum glandulosum), skunk currant (Ribes glandulosum), and red raspberry (Rubus idaeus). There was recent 

evidence of extensive blowdown likely caused during large storm events over the winter of 2010 to 2011 

(Herzog, K. personal communication, May 2011). As a result, there were very few remaining standing large trees 

within the first 100 to 150 m upstream of both creeks. Transect SV4 had a large amount of fallen woody debris 

(in total, 3.35 m (or 22%) of the 15 m transect was comprised of fallen woody debris). Due to extensive 

blowdown events, tree quadrats had low numbers of trees. Trees were not noted within the quadrats for SV1 or 

LV1. The highest number of trees was found in LV4 which had a mix of 12 hybrid white spruce and sub-alpine fir 

Layer 4 trees. Other predominant vegetation species included: paper birch (Betula papyrifera), showy aster 

(Aster conspicuus), oak fern (Gymnocarpium dryopteris), common horsetail (Equisetum arvense), northern 

scouring-rush (Equisetum variegatum), bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), beaked sedge (Carex rostrata), 

ragged moss (Brachythecium sp.), and common leafy moss (Plagiomnium medium). 

Bank characteristics along Six Mile creek showed some bank erosion especially along bank sections where the 

creek bends, and minor undercutting also in these sections. Canopy cover over the creek was variable with 

lowest cover found at SV1 (1.7 cover) and highest at SV4 (15% cover). Bank stability along Lamonti was 

moderately stable at the lower sections of the creek (LV1 and LV4); however, at LV2, there was extensive 

erosion of the bank. At this location, the top of bank was quite high (at least 2 to 3 m above the creek) and the 

bank was composed of large cobbles and sandy material. Farther upstream along Lamonti, just downstream 

from the bridge, there was evidence of flooding over the top of bank which is indicative that spring flows likely

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 20 


REVIEW 

reached record levels for these creek systems this year. These high flows may have caused the extensive 

erosion noted at certain sections along Lamonti Creek. 

3.5.2 Factor Ross and Ole Creeks 

Four transects were established at both Factor Ross and Ole creeks and consisted of transects FV1-FV4 and 

OV1-OV4, respectively. Vegetation surrounding the mouths of each creek included a mixture of large black 

cottonwood, hybrid white spruce, sub-alpine fir, paper birch, mountain alder, black twinberry, bunchberry, 

twinflower, wild sarsaparilla (Aralia nudicaulis), and extensive moss cover of red-stemmed feathermoss, step 

moss, knight’s plume, juniper haircap moss (Polytrichum juniperinum), and pelt lichens (Peltigera sp.). 

Blow-down was not quite as extensive at the northern end of Williston reservoir and large riparian trees 

(e.g., black cottonwood) were prevalent. All tree quadrants for both Factor Ross and Ole creeks had at least 

one tree. The highest number of trees was found in FV3 and OV3 which each had three trees. FV3 had 

two lodgepole pine and one paper birch; all Layer 1 trees, and OV3 had three paper birch (one - Layer 1, and 

two – Layer 2). 

Bank characteristics of Factor Ross Creek appeared more stable than Six Mile and Lamonti creeks as less bank 

scouring and erosion was noted along the banks of this creek. The bank near FV3 was very stable and was 

composed primarily of rock with the transect starting above a small cliff area. Similarly, along Ole Creek, the 

upper reaches of the creek flowed through a steeply incised rocky canyon and bank erosion appeared less 

prevalent at the lower reaches. Canopy cover over Factor Ross and Ole creeks was much higher than at 

Six Mile or Lamonti creeks with lowest cover found at OV2 (20% cover) and highest at FV1 (60% cover). Copies 

of all data cards for vegetation including photo point record forms, tree plots and vegetation transects are found 

in Appendix H. 

4.0 DISCUSSION 

4.1 Fish 

4.1.1 Spawner Surveys 

Spawning fish, redds or eggs were not observed in any of the creeks during the spawner surveys. Suitable 

spawning substrates were observed in the creeks but stream conditions were generally not favourable for 

spawning during the surveys. A larger than normal snowpack and heavy precipitation in 2011 resulted in atypical 

stream conditions during the spring surveys, with much colder water temperatures and higher discharges than 

were expected. These anomalous conditions affected the suitability of the streams for spawning and our ability to 

effectively observe and quantify fish spawning activity. 

During the first site visit, temperatures varied between 0 and 3.5°C, which is below the preferred spawning 

temperature for Arctic Grayling (above 4°C), and much lower than the preferred temperature ranges of rainbow 

trout and suckers (10 to 12°C) (McPhail 2009). During the second site visit, water temperatures remained cold 

(3 to 5°C) and discharges were very high, nearing freshet conditions, which is not ideal for Rainbow Trout 

spawning. High flows and turbid water also impeded visual observations of spawners and redds, made 

snorkelling and angling ineffective, and made wading in the streams difficult.

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 21 


REVIEW 

Because of the atypical stream conditions during our surveys, it is not possible to say how much spawning by 

target species occurred in the study creeks. It is possible that Rainbow Trout spawned in some of the creeks but 

much later than normal when flows receded and temperatures increased. Alternatively, the atypical conditions in 

the streams in 2011 could have resulted in very little successful spawning at all. Many fish species found in 

northern latitudes typically spawn only every few years when conditions are ideal (McPhail 2009). 

None of the study creeks currently have discharge gauges or temperature loggers. Monitoring water temperature 

and/or stream discharge would improve understanding of environmental cues and preferred conditions for 

spawning by the target species in Williston Reservoir tributaries. In addition, monitoring temperature or discharge 

would allow researchers to plan the timing of field visits to coordinate with preferred stream conditions of target 

species. Therefore, we recommend the addition of long-term temperature monitoring to the Williston tributary 

enhancement monitoring program. Options for temperature monitoring include thermistors with satellite up-link 

for remote real-time updates, or archival loggers that could be downloaded periodically during a site visit. 

4.1.2 Juvenile and Small-Bodied Fish Survey 

One of the main objectives of the electrofishing survey was to estimate the abundance of juvenile fish of the 

target species. Estimates of the numbers of juvenile fish will be compared before and after enhancement to 

reflect the effectiveness of habitat enhancement on adfluvial spawner access to the tributaries and rearing 

habitat within these streams. However, catches of fish, especially of target species, were so low that abundance 

estimates could not be generated using the proposed analysis. All sites had catches of less than ten fish of all 

species combined. Rainbow Trout, one of the target species, were caught at only a few sites, with four or fewer 

fish per site. These small catches suggest that densities of fish, both target and non-target species, are quite low 

in the reaches of the tributaries sampled (at least during the 2011 survey). 

Electrofishing surveys conducted during this study do provide baseline data about the species and life stages 

present in the study creeks. Rainbow Trout (40 to 120 mm) were present in Six Mile and Lamonti creeks, 

although densities appear to be fairly low. Mountain Whitefish (70 to 330 mm) were caught in all four creeks. The 

sites sampled in Factor Ross and Ole creeks had greater numbers of Mountain Whitefish than did Six Mile and 

Lamonti creeks. Prickly Sculpin were present in all four study creeks. Neither Arctic Grayling nor sucker sp., 

which spawn in the spring when access tributaries can be impeded by perched mouths or debris jams, were 

observed in any of the study creeks. Arctic Grayling are not known to occur in any of the study creeks except for 

Six Mile (BC Ministry of Environment 2011), but are present in some of the larger tributaries of Williston 

(Cubberley and Hengeveld, 2010), and re-colonization of smaller tributaries may be possible, particularly if 

access enhancement is successful. The presence of large adult (likely spawners) and young-of-year Bull Trout in 

Ole Creek suggests that this species is successfully spawning in the creek. Failure to catch certain species in 

the study creeks during surveys in 2011 (e.g., Rainbow Trout not caught in Factor Ross or Ole creeks) should 

not be interpreted as absence of these species from the creeks. Our surveys sampled limited spatial area (two 

or three, 100 m sites per creek), and used only one capture method (i.e., backpack electrofishing), so it is likely 

that the species caught are not representative of the entire local fish community. 

The multiple-pass removal-depletion electrofishing survey used in this study provided baseline data about the 

species present in the study creeks, but failed to provide estimates of abundance of any species because of the 

very small number of fish caught. In addition, the method proved to be logistically challenging for the study 

creeks. Many sections of the creeks were characterized by fast riffle habitats, steep gradients, and/or large 

amounts of woody debris, which made installing block nets difficult (nets were torn or moved out of position by

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 22 


REVIEW 

current at several sites) and many potential sites were not feasible to sample because of practical or safety 

constraints. Access to sample sites with electrofishing and block net equipment (by boat and hiking) was also 

labour and time intensive, which limited the number of sites that could be sampled. For these reasons, we 

recommend that alternative methods be considered for the juvenile and small-bodied fish population survey 

component of this monitoring program. 

One suggested alternative is a mark-resight program to estimate juvenile fish abundance. Minnow traps would 

be used to capture juvenile and small fish, which would be marked with hook and yarn markers and released at 

the capture site. A night-time snorkel survey would be conducted to enumerate the number of marked and unmarked 

fish at the sample sites. Fluorescent lights can be used during snorkel surveys to help observe 

fluorescent dye VIE tags. A population estimate would be generated based on the number of marked and unmarked 

fish observed. Similar mark-resight programs have been used in other locations to estimate the 

abundance of small and juvenile fish in small streams (Bonneau, Thurow, and Scarnechhia, 1995) and for other 

BC Hydro studies (Decker, Mcnair and Lewis, 2010). Surveys would be conducted at index sites that would be 

re-sampled each study year. These methods offer several advantages over closed-cell electrofishing depletion 

surveys, including potentially more accurate population estimates (Decker, Mcnair and Lewis, 2010) and less 

time and effort for transporting and installing block nets. 

4.2 Amphibians 

Very few amphibians were observed or heard during the three sampling surveys. In addition, little off-channel 

habitat was present at any of the four streams. Most of the habitat that was observed turned out to be ephemeral 

in nature and may not have supported appropriate conditions for amphibian breeding or rearing. Suitable habitat 

is present within the zone of inundation (wet mud flats) at all the stream mouths, evidence of breeding observed 

in this area included long-toed salamander eggs at Six Mile Creek and numerous juvenile western toad at the 

mouth of Factor Ross. 

4.3 Birds 

As the abundance and diversity of migratory birds is invariably linked to numerous factors throughout their range, 

it is anticipated that linking changes in the diversity or abundance of birds in riparian areas to proposed 

enhancement works will be difficult and likely not possible. As such, it is recommended that songbird monitoring 

be suspended and that efforts be reallocated to fish monitoring where the designed enhancement is most likely 

to yield a change. 

4.4 Vegetation 

The key management question relating to the riparian vegetation section of the Tributary Habitat Review 

monitoring program is: does riparian vegetation along tributaries increase in abundance and diversity as a result 

of enhancement? The primary sampling objective of the riparian vegetation task is to address the management 

question posed above by collecting data necessary to draw inferences and to test the following null hypothesis:

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 23 


REVIEW 

Ho: Riparian vegetation abundance and diversity in and near tributaries does not change following 

enhancement to tributaries. 

This management question is difficult to answer without clearly defined locations for enhancement works on 

each of the treatment tributaries. As such, in consultation with BC Hydro, it is recommended to suspend the 

vegetation portion of the Williston project until enhancement works can be more clearly defined. Once locations 

are chosen and enhancement works progress, an example monitoring program could include vegetation 

monitoring plots that may be established adjacent to the enhancement works to more clearly determine if 

enhancement works are changing abundance and diversity of riparian vegetation. 

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 

Lessons learned during the 2011 field season and a refinement in the scope of the study in consultation with 

BC Hydro has led us to the following recommendations. Stream enhancement designs have been reviewed and 

study plans adjusted accordingly (Kerr Wood Leidal, 2011). 

� Installation of satellite enabled water temperature data loggers in each stream is recommended in order to 

inform field program scheduling and provide long-term temperature data to further inform the monitoring 

program. An inference of the water level may be made from temperature information assuming that low 

temperatures (at or near 0°C) correspond with snow melt and high water levels. Our experience during the 

first year of the study was that high water levels and cold temperatures, during anomalous spring weather, 

may have contributed to low fish capture and no spawning observations. Adjustments to the field 

scheduling (i.e., later in the season) may have yielded better results and may have been forecast with this 

type of system. 

� 

� 

� 

Suspend vegetation sampling from the field program and reallocate effort into fish sampling/monitoring. As 

the proposed enhancement works at the stream outlet are unlikely to result in a measurable change to 

riparian vegetation composition at upstream locations, it is recommended that this component of the study 

be postponed until the year of treatment. Additionally, a severe blow-down event (assumed to have 

occurred during the winter of 2011) at the southern study sites will be an important contributing factor to 

changes in vegetation composition over time and will likely mask any measurable impacts from 

enhancement works, should they occur. Once a treatment design has been selected, a monitoring program 

tailored to the enhancement work can be implemented. 

Should the proposed enhancement design require removal of vegetated berms, deltas, or the like, there 

could have been effects to vegetation and terrestrial habitat worth assessing in GMSMON17. As the Water 

Use Planning Committee did not know what works would be needed to improve the tributary access at the 

time of issuing the Terms of Reference, songbird habitat monitoring was included in the monitoring 

program. Now that an implementation design has been selected that does not require a measurable 

change to songbird habitat, the recommendation is that H6 has been answered and does not need further 

study. 

Modify the fish inventory program to a mark re-sight method. As the density of fish in the streams over the 

first year of data was too low for a meaningful estimation of population via the depletion survey method, it is 

recommended that a fish marking, followed by snorkel survey method be adopted. Fish would be captured 

via minnow traps set in ideal habitats along the lower reaches of each stream, captured fish greater than

� 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 24 


REVIEW 

50 mm would then be marked with a fish hook tag. A succeeding night-time snorkel survey would then 

count fish in various habitats (i.e., pools, riffles, etc.) and identify the proportion of observed fish that are 

marked, allowing for a population estimate. It is assumed that a greater area of each stream will be 

surveyed via this method resulting in greater detection of fish. A number of health and safety considerations 

are required for this type of work and a comprehensive plan and review process will occur, in consultation 

with BC Hydro, prior to the commencement of this program. 

The amphibian monitoring procedure should be adjusted to better reflect field conditions and allow for a 

consistent approach at each stream, despite considerable differences in the availability and quality of 

habitat. It is recommended that an area constrained search approach be adopted whereby searchers spend 

the required time to adequately search available prime habitat (i.e., wetlands and lentic side channels) so 

that time is not wasted searching poor habitat. The effort is then recorded via an estimate of the area 

searched by each searcher and the total person-time spent, rather than simply constrained by time, which 

we found resulted in searching poor habitat to fill the required search period. 

Scheduling for the 2012 field program will be contingent on BCH’s approval of the above recommendations. If all 

are adopted, we suggest that the field program be scheduled over two field visits. The first in the spring once 

water temperatures are suitable for Rainbow Trout spawning surveys; amphibian surveys and mapping of 

suitable spawning areas in the stream would also be undertaken at this time. Fisheries population work and 

additional amphibian sampling would then occur in the summer.

6.0 CLOSURE 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 25 


REVIEW 

We trust that the information contained in this summary report meets your present requirements. Please contact 

the undersigned if you have any questions or concerns regarding this report. 

GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD. 

ORIGINAL SIGNED ORIGINAL SIGNED 

Darryl Arsenault, M.Sc., R.P.Bio. Bob Chapman, R.P.Bio. 

Fisheries Biologist Associate, Biosciences Group Manager 

TS/KP/DA/BC/tc 

Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation. 

n:\active\2011\1492\11-1492-0016 williston\deliverables\wp\final 2011 report 22may_12\1114920016-r-rev0-2000-final 2011 report 22may_12.docx

7.0 REFERENCES 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 26 


REVIEW 

BC Conservation Data Centre (BC CDC). 2011. BC Species and Ecosystems Explorer. BC Ministry of 

Environment. Victoria, BC. Available at: http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/eswp/ (Accessed Nov. 2011). 

Corkran, C.C.; C. Thoms. 1996. Amphibians of Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia: A Field Identification 

Guide. Lone Pine Publishing, Vancouver, British Columbia. 

BC Hydro. 2011. Recreation Areas - Williston. Accessed online October 25, 2011. 

 

BC Hydro. 2010. Peace River Water Use Plan Monitoring Program Terms of Reference. GMSMON-17 Tributary 

Habitat Review. RFP #652. December 30, 2010. 

BC Ministry of Environment. 2011. Fisheries Inventory Data Queries. FISS Points File Generator. Accessed 

online 31 October 2011. 

Bonneau, J. L., R. F. Thurow, and D. L. Scarnecchia. 1995. Capture, marking, and enumeration of juvenile bull 

trout and cutthroat trout in small, low-conductivity streams. North American Journal of Fisheries 

Management 15:563-568. 

Booth, B.P., and F.B. Corbould. 2003. Abundance and distribution of osprey nest sites in the Williston Reservoir 

area, North-Central British Columbia 2002. PWFWCP Report No. 277. 

 

Canfield, R.H., 1941. Application of the line interception method in sampling range vegetation. J. For. 45, 388– 

394. 

Corbould, F.B., and P.E. Hengeveld. 2000. Distribution, species composition, and abundance of waterfowl 

wintering in the Parsnip River drainage, 2000 PWFWCP Report No. 233. 

 

Cubberley, J.C and P.E. Hengeveld. 2010. Site selection and design recommendations for Williston Reservoir 

tributary fish access mitigation trial, north British Columbia. Synergy Applied Ecology, Mackenzie, BC. 43 

pp. + app. 

Decker, S., J. Macnair, and G. Lewis. 2010. Coquitlam River Monitoring Program: 2000-2009 Results. Lower 

Coquitlam Fish Productivity Index Year 4. 134 pp. 

Government of BC. 2009. iMap BC Version 3.1.1. Ministry of Natural Resource Operation. Accessed online 

October 17, 2011. 

Hengeveld, P.E. 1999. Amphibian reconnaissance surveys in the Williston and Reservoir Watershed. PWFWCP 

Report No. 207. 

Hengeveld, P.E. 2000. Presence and distribution of amphibians in the Williston and Dinosaur Reservoir 

Watersheds. PWFWCP Report No. 212. 

Herzog, K. 2011. Personal communication (telephone conversation with T. Seebacher, Kelowna, BC). 

Engineering Officer, Mackenzie District. May 2011.

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 27 


REVIEW 

Huff, M.H., K.A. Bettinger, H.L. Ferguson, M.J. Brown, B. Altman. 2000. A Habitat-Based Point-Count Protocol 

for Terrestrial Birds, Emphasizing Washington and Oregon. Prepared for the US Department of 

Agriculture, the Forest Service, and the Pacific Northwest Research Station. General Technical Report 

PNW-GTR-501. Accessed online January 8, 2011. 

Kerr Wood Leidal (KWL). 2011. GMSWORKS #19 Williston Reservoir Trial Tributaries Design. Final Report 

submitted December 2011 to BC Hydro, Burnaby, BC. 

Langston, A. 2010. Personal Communication (telephone conversation with D. Arsenault, Golder Associates, 

Kelowna, BC). Fish Biologist, Peace-Williston Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program. 9 February. 

MacKinnon, A. C. Delong., D. Meidinger. 1990. A Field Guide for Identification and Interpretation of Ecosystems 

of the Northwest Portion of the Prince George Forest Region. BC Ministry of Forests. Land Management 

Handbook 21. 116pp. 

McPhail, J.D. 2007. The Freshwater Fishes of British Columbia. University of Alberta Press, Edmonton, AB. pp. 

620. 

Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. 2004a. Best Management Practices for Amphibians and Reptiles in 

Urban and Rural Environments in British Columbia. 

 

National Geographic. 1999. Field Guide to the Birds of North America. Third edition. National Geographic 

Society, Washington, DC, USA. 

Resources Inventory Committee (RIC). 1998a. Species Inventory Fundamentals. Standards for Components of 

British Columbia’s Biodiversity No. 1. Prepared by the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks 

Resources Inventory Branch for the Terrestrial Ecosystem Task Force Resources Inventory Committee. 

November, 1998. Version 2.0. 

Resources Inventory Committee (RIC). 1998b. Inventory Methods for Pond-breeding Amphibians and Painted 

Turtle. Standards for Components of British Columbia’s Biodiversity No. 1. Prepared by the Ministry of 

Environment, Lands and Parks Resources Inventory Branch for the Terrestrial Ecosystem Task Force 

Resources Inventory Committee. March 13, 1998. Version 2.0. 

 

Resources Inventory Committee (RIC). 1999. Inventory Methods for Forest and Grassland Songbirds Version 

2.0. Standards for Components of British Columbia’s Biodiversity No.15. 

 

Richter, K.O. and A.L. Azous. 1995. Amphibian occurrence and wetland characteristics in the Puget Sound 

Basin. Wetlands 15: 305 

Stevens, D.L., Jr., A.R. Olsen. 2004. Spatially-balanced sampling of natural resources. Journal of American 

Statistical Association 99(465): 262–278.

APPENDIX A 

Site Maps 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 


REVIEW

E:\_Work\1492 - Kelowna\11-1492-0016 Williston\Drafting\2000\GIS\1114920016_2000_Overview.mxd 

6300000 

6250000 

6200000 

6150000 

6100000 

West ! Landing 

! 

Leo Creek 

! 

350000 

Old Hogem 

! 

350000 

Ingenika Mine 

! 

Middle River 

! 

Tsay Keh Dene 

! 

12 Mile 

! 

400000 


!( 

Ole Creek 

!( 

Germansen Landing 

! 

400000 

Manson Creek 

! 

450000 

6 mile creek 

450000 

!(!( 

500000 

Lamonti Creek 

Mackenzie 

! 

McLeod Lake 

! 

500000 

Boring Ranch 

! 

Pink Mountain 

! 

Brady Ranch 

! 

Beatton Ranch 

! 

Carlson 

! 

McKearney Ranch 

! 

Simpson Ranch 

! 

Wagner Ranch Lexau Ranch 

! ! ! ! ! 

Hickethier Ranch 

McLean ! Ranch 

Federal Ranch 

! 

Lemoray 

! 

Azu Ski Village 

! 

550000 

550000 

Wonowon 

! 

Kobes 

! 

Beryl Prairie 

! 

Lynx Creek 

! 

Hudson's Hope 

! 

Moberly Lake 

! 

Chetwynd 

! 

600000 

³ 

Buick 

! 

Attachie 

! 

Farrell Creek 

! 

Dokie Siding 

Pine Valley 

! Hasler Flat 

! 

! 

Twidwell Bend 

! 

Lone Prairie 

! 

600000 

6300000 

6250000 

6200000 

6150000 

6100000 

LEGEND 

!( Site Location 

Roads 

REFERENCE 

1. Base imagery: Bing Maps; 

(c) 2010 Microsoft Corporation and its data suppliers 

2. Populated Place Names, Roads: DMTI Spacial Inc. 

3. Waterbody, Watercourse, Roads: Geobase.ca 

Projection: UTM Zone 10 Datum: NAD 83 

30 0 

30 

PROJECT 

TITLE 

Waterbody 

Principal Highway 

Secondary Highway 

Major Road 

Local road 

SCALE 

1:1,000,000 

BC HYDRO GMSMON #17 

WILLISTON RESERVOIR TRIBUTARY MONITORING 

WILLISTON RESERVOIR, BC 

OVERVIEW MAP 

KILOMETRES 

PROJECT NO. 11-1492-0016 PHASE No. 2000 

DESIGN DJA 3 May. 2011 SCALE AS SHOWN 

GIS JG 3 May. 2011 

CHECK TS 31 Oct. 2011 

REVIEW DJA 31 Oct. 2011 

MAP: 1 

REV. 0

APPENDIX B 

Site Photos 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 


REVIEW

File Location: N:\Common\Templates\Powerpoint\Photo Template.pot 

Photo 1: Looking upstream at the outlet of Six-Mile Creek. 

Photo taken May 10, 2011. 

Photo 2: Looking upstream at the outlet of Six-Mile Creek. 


SELECTED SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 

Kamloops, BC 

PROJECT No. 11-1492-0016 SCALE: None REV. 0 

DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 

BC- Oct. 24, 2011 

PLATE 1


Photo 3: Looking downstream at the outlet of Six-Mile Creek. 

Photo taken June 8, 2011. 

Photo 4: Looking upstream along Six Mile Creek. 

Photo taken August 9, 2011. 




DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 2


Photo 5: Looking upstream at the outlet of Lamonti. 


Photo 6: Looking downstream at the outlet of Lamonti. 





DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 3


Photo 7: Looking upstream at the outlet of Lamonti. 


Photo 8: Looking downstream at the outlet of Lamonti. 





DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 4


Photo 9: Looking upstream at the outlet of Factor Ross Creek. 


Photo 10: Looking downstream below the outlet of Factor Ross. 





DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 5


Photo 11: Looking upstream at Factor Ross Creek. 


Photo 12: Looking downstream into bay at Factor Ross Creek. 





DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 6


Photo 13: Woody debris collection adjacent to the mouth of 

Factor Ross Creek. Photo taken May 15, 2011. 

Photo 14: Looking downstream into bay near mouth of Ole Creek. 





DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 7


Photo 15: Looking upstream towards mouth of Ole Creek. 


Photo 16: Looking downstream from mouth of Ole Creek. 





DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 8


Photo 17: Looking upstream from Ole Creek. 


Photo 18: Looking downstream from mouth of Ole Creek. 

Photo taken Aug 16, 2011. 




DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 9


Photo 19: Electrofishing along Six Mile Creek. 


Photo 20: Mountain Whitefish caught along Factor Ross Creek. 





DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 10


Photo 21: Electrofishing along Factor Ross Creek. 


Photo 22: Adult Brook Trout caught along Ole Creek while 

electrofishing. Photo taken August 17, 2011. 




DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 11


Photo 23: Installed blocknet along Factor Ross Creek. 


Photo 24: Dead Common Garter Snake found on road into 

Six Mile Bay campground. Photo taken August 11, 2011. 




DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 12


Photo 25: Adult Western Toad spotted near Ole Creek. 


Photo 26: Wood Frog egg mass spotted near bridge in small pond 

off Factor Ross Creek. Photo taken May 16, 2011. 




DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 13


Photo 27: Grizzly bear tracks spotted along Ole Creek mudflats. 


Photo 28: Harlequin Duck spotted along Lamonti Creek. 





DRAWN 

CHECK 

REVIEW 

KP Oct. 24, 2011 

TS Oct. 24, 2011 


PLATE 14

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 


REVIEW 

APPENDIX C 

Fish Collection and Wildlife Permit Documents

File: 34770-20 

Permit No.: PG11-70349 

Ministry of Natural Resource 

Operations 

FISH COLLECTION PERMIT 

Research 

Permit Holder: Golder Associates Ltd. – Darryl Arsenault 

220-1755 Springfield Road, Kelowna BC V1X 5V5 

Client No.: 19914 

Authorized Persons: Kim Poupard, Eric Smith, Dan Busemeyer, Tanya Seebacher, Kate Moss, 

David Roscoe, Sophia Anderson and Darryl Arsenault. 

Pursuant to section 19 of the Wildlife Act, RSBC 1996, Chap. 488, and section 18 of the Angling 

and Scientific Regulations, BC Reg. 125/90, the above named persons are hereby authorized to 

collect fish for scientific purposes from non-tidal waters subject to the conditions set forth in this 

Permit: 

Permitted Sampling Period: July 18, 2011 to August 30, 2011 

Permitted Waterbodies: Omineca Region – Six Mile Creek (230-902800), Lamonti Creek 

(230-902900), Ole Creek (230-960400), Factor Ross Creek (230-977300) 

Permitted Sampling Techniques: MT, AG and EF (subject to permit terms and conditions) 

Potential Species: GR, DV, BT, RB, RSC and Suckers (subject to permit terms and 

conditions) 

Provincial Conditions: (Permit holders must be aware of all terms and conditions): 

See Appendix A. 

Specific Conditions: 

See Appendix A. 

Authorized by: 

Susanne Williamson, Fisheries Information Specialist 

A person authorized by the Regional Manager 

Recreational Fisheries & Wildlife Programs 

Omineca Region 

__________________________ 

Date: July 18, 2011 Permit Fee $25 

Any contravention or failure to comply with the terms and conditions of this permit is an 

offense under the Wildlife Act, RSBC 1996, Chap. 488 and B.C. Reg. 125/90. 

Fish, Wildlife & Habitat Management Branch 

Permit & Authorization Service Bureau 

PO Box 9372 Stn Prov Gov 

Victoria BC V8W 9M3 

Last Updated: 02-04-11 Page 1


Last Updated: 02-04-11 

Appendix A: Fish Collection Permit Conditions 

Any Variation of the following terms and conditions will require explicit authorization by the 

appropriate regional Fish & Wildlife Section Head. 

Provincial Conditions 

1. This collecting permit is not valid 

" in national parks, 

" in provincial parks unless a Park Use Permit is also obtained, 

" in tidal waters, 

" for eulachon or for salmon* other than kokanee, or 

" for collecting fish by angling unless the permit holder and crew members possess a valid angling 

licence. 

This collecting permit is only valid for species listed as threatened, endangered or extirpated under the Species 

at Risk Act (SARA) in conjunction with a permit issued under Section 73 of SARA from Fisheries and 

Oceans Canada. 

*Contact the Department of Fisheries and Oceans for fish collecting permits for salmon, eulachon or SARA 

listed species (see Appendix B). 

2. The permit holder (or the project supervisor) named on the application for a scientific collection permit will 

carry a copy of this permit while engaged in fish collecting and produce it upon request of a conservation 

officer, fisheries officer or constable. 

3. Any specimens surplus to scientific requirements and any species not authorized for collection in this permit 

shall be immediately and carefully released at the point of capture. 

4. Fish collected under authority of this permit shall not be used for food or any purpose other than the objectives 

set out in the approved application for a scientific collection permit. The permit holder shall not sell, barter, 

trade, or give away, or offer to sell, barter, trade or give away fish collected under authority of this permit. 

Dead fish shall be disposed of in a manner that will not constitute a health hazard, nuisance or a threat to 

wildlife. 

5. No fish collected under authority of this permit shall be 

" transported alive unless authorized by this permit, or 

" transplanted unless separately authorized by the Federal/Provincial Fish Transplant Committee. 

6. The permit holder shall, within 90 days of the expiry of this permit, submit a report of fish collection activities. 

Interim reports may also be required and shall be submitted as required by the permit issuer. All submissions 

must be filed electronically to: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fish_data_sub/index.html 

Reporting specifications, information and templates are available from this website and outline the mandatory 

information requirements. Prior notification of submission or questions regarding data report standards can be 

made to: fishdatasub@gov.bc.ca 

7. This collecting permit is subject to cancellation at any time and shall be surrendered to a conservation officer on 

demand or to the issuer upon written notice of its cancellation. 

8. This permit is valid only for the activities approved on the application form and in accordance with any 

restrictions set out therein. 

9. This permit is valid only for trained, qualified staff named in the Application. The permit holder will comply 

with all Worker's Compensation Board requirements and other regulatory requirements. Permit holders are 

responsible for ensuring staff members listed on the permit are properly certified for specific sampling methods 

or activities (e.g. electroshocking). 

10. Any workers not listed on the permit must be supervised by the permit holder or one of the additional persons as 

named on the permit.


Last Updated: 02-04-11 

Appendix A: Fish Collection Permit Conditions Continued 

11. All sampling equipment that has been previously used outside of B.C. must be cleaned of mud and dirt and 

disinfected with 100mg/L chlorine bleach before using in any water course to prevent the spread of fish 

pathogens (e.g. Whirling disease) and / or invasive plant species. Any washed off dirt or mud must be disposed 

of in a manner such that it cannot enter a watercourse untreated. 

12. No electrofishing is to take place in waters below five degrees C. 

13. Electrofishing may not be conducted in the vicinity of spawning gravel, redds, or spawning fish, or around 

gravels which are capable of supporting eggs or developing embryos of any species of salmonid at a time of 

year when such eggs or embryos may be present. 

14. Angling must only occur in accordance with the regulations specified in the current BC Freshwater Fishing 

Regulations Synopsis. 

Region Specific Conditions 


" No electrofishing will be permitted between September 15 and June 15 in streams containing bull trout. 

" Voucher specimens for all regionally significant red and blue-listed species (3 per species), with exception 

to SARA-listed white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus), must be submitted to the Regional Fish 

Information Specialist as per RISC standards. 

" All sampling gear follow Association of Professional Biologist’s advisory practice bulletin #5. Practice 

Advisory Didymo, see: http://www.apbbc.bc.ca/files/Didymo.pdf. 

Appendix B: Table 1 - Species at Risk 

The following are species at risk that have been listed by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in 

Canada (COSEWIC) as either endangered, threatened or a species of special concern. Species also listed under the 

Species at Risk Act (SARA) are identified with an asterisk, and are subject to additional permitting requirements 

through the Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). 

Common Name Scientific Name 

Benthic Paxton Lake Stickleback *Gasterosteus sp. 

Benthic Vananda Creek Stickleback *Gasterosteus sp. 

Limnetic Paxton Lake Stickleback *Gasterosteus sp. 

Limnetic Vananda Creek Stickleback *Gasterosteus sp. 

Nooksack Dace *Rhinichthys sp. 

Morrison Creek Lamprey *Lampetra richardsoni 

Vancouver Lamprey (Cowichan Lake Lamprey) *Lampetra macrostoma 

Cultus Pygmy Sculpin *Cottus sp. 

Shorthead Sculpin *Cottus confusus 

Hotwater Physa *Physella wrighti 

Limnetic Enos Lake Stickleback Gasterosteus sp. 

Benthic Enos Lake Stickleback Gasterosteus sp. 

Salish Sucker Catostomus sp. 

Speckled Dace Rhinichthys osculus 

Charlotte Unarmoured Stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus 

Columbia Mottled Sculpin Cottus bairdi hubbsi 

Giant Stickleback Gasterosteus sp. 

Green Sturgeon Acipenser medirostris 

Umatilla Dace Rhinichthys umatilla 

White Sturgeon Acipenser transmontanus 

Applications for permits to specifically collect and retain listed species must be reviewed by the appropriate 

Recovery Team, who will screen permits to ensure that any impacts on listed species are acceptable. For white 

sturgeon the contact is Steve McAdam (steve.mcadam@gov.bc.ca). For listed non-game freshwater fish the contact 

is Jordan Rosenfeld (jordan.rosenfeld@gov.bc.ca), co-chair of the Non-Game Freshwater Fish Recovery Team.

PERMIT HOLDER Golder Associates Ltd 

220-1755 Springfield Rd 

Kelowna BC V1Y 5V5 

WILDLIFE ACT 

PERMIT PG11-70683 

ATTENTION: Tanya Seebacher 

PHONE: (250) 860-8424 

FAX: (250) 860-9874 

IS AUTHORIZED UNDER s. 2 (c)(i) of the Permit Regulation, B.C. Reg. 253/2000, 

PERMIT 

78470-25 

TO Live capture and on-site release of Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas), Columbia 

Spotted Frog (Rana luteiventris), Boreal Chorus Frog (Pseudacris maculate), 

Wood Frog (Lithobates sylvatica) and Long-toed Salamander (Ambystoma 

macrodactylum) in Omineca region, specifically Williston Lake, British Columbia for 

the purpose of conducting an amphibian inventory (abundance and diversity). 

SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: 

TERMS OF PERMIT The permit holder must follow the attached British Columbia Interim Hygiene 

Protocols for Amphibian field staff and researchers. 

COMPLIANCE 

ADVISORY 

The permit holder must comply with the terms in Appendix A. 

Failure to comply with any term of this permit is an offence under the Wildlife Act, 

and may result in any or all of prosecution, suspension of the permit, cancellation 

of the permit, ineligibility for future permits, and denial of future permit requests. 

PERIOD OF PERMIT This permit is only valid from July 7, 2011 to August 30, 2011. 

DATE OF ISSUE July 7, 2011 

SIGNATURE OF ISSUER 

Doug Wilson, RP Bio 

Wildlife Biologist 

A person authorized by the Regional Manager 

Recreational Fisheries & Wildlife Programs 


PERMIT FEE 

$100.00 

HCTF SURCHARGE 

$10.00 

Last Updated: 12-13-10 Page 1 of 6

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS: 

APPENDIX A 

TERMS OF PERMIT 


1. The permit holder must maintain an accurate up to date record of the wildlife hunted, trapped or killed 

under the permit that includes the following information: 

a) common name of the wildlife; 

b) location where the wildlife was taken, including a UTM grid location in NAD83 to + or – 100m 

accuracy (zone 2 digits, easting 6 digits, northing 7 digits) 

c) the date the wildlife was hunted, trapped or killed; 

d) the sex and age class of the wildlife taken; 

e) the bands or tags on the wildlife; and 

f) a description of all nests, dams or other structures destroyed or removed. 

NOTE: A blank reporting form (Appendix C) is attached to the end of this permit for your convenience 

2. The permit holder must submit the original copy of this record to the Permit and Authorization Service 

Bureau within 21 days of the permit’s expiry. 

3. The permit holder must produce a copy of the record referred to in paragraph 1 on the demand of an 

officer. 

4. The permit holder shall within 90 days of the expiry of this permit submit a report of activities related to 

this permit. 

Submissions must be filed electronically to: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wildlife/wsi/contributions.htm. This 

website contains the reporting specifications, data templates, and outlines the mandatory information 

requirements. Interim reports may also be required and must be submitted as required by Regional 

Biologists. 

GENERAL CONDITIONS: 

1. The permit holder must comply with all laws applicable to the activities carried out under this permit. 

2. This permit extends to the permit holder’s employees or contractors only when they are engaged in the 

direct performance of their duties on behalf of the permit holder. 

3. All work is to be undertaken by trained professionals with experience in capturing and handling 

amphibians. 

4. The permit holder must take all reasonably necessary steps to ensure that public safety is not 

jeopardized and fish or wildlife habitat is not damaged by any action taken under authority of this permit. 

5. Capture and handling of specimens to be in accordance with the Standards for Live Animal Capture and 

Handling Guidelines established by the Ministry of Environment. 

See http://www.ilmb.gov.bc.ca/risc/pubs/tebiodiv/capt/assets/capt.pdf 

6. The permit holder must ensure that the wildlife are treated in a humane manner, and are not subjected to 

any unnecessary harm or suffering. 

7. No intentional mortality of red or blue listed species is to occur. All reasonable steps must be taken to 

ensure accidental mortality does not occur. 


8. All other small mammals and other organisms captured should be released unharmed. 

9. If working in potential Pacific Water Shrew habitat, works must be consistent with the most current Draft 

Best Management Practices for Pacific Water Shrew in Urban and Rural Areas, September 2009, by 

Craig, Vennesland and Welstead. It is the responsibility of the contractor/permit holder to obtain the 

most current version. 

10. Euthanized specimens are to be deposited at the Royal British Columbia Museum (RBCM). 

11. Permit holder shall provide upon conclusion of this years project, a copy of the final report, to the Permit 

and Authorization Service Bureau. 


GENERAL 

APPENDIX B 

ADVISORY 


# It is the permit holder’s responsibility to be aware of all applicable laws and the limits of this permit. For example, 

this permit does not give the permit holder authority to access or travel though any private land without permission 

from the landowner. 

# The Province is not liable for any illness contracted through wildlife handling. It is the responsibility of the permit 

holder to inform themselves of possible health hazards, and to ensure that all reasonably necessary safety 

measures are undertaken. 

# If applicable, the permit holder is responsible for renewing his or her own permit. The issuer is not obliged to send a 

reminder notice. 

LEGISLATION 

Here are some, but not all, relevant excerpts from the Wildlife Act: 

Property in Wildlife 

2 (1) Ownership in all wildlife in British Columbia is vested in the government. 

2 (4) If a person by accident or for the protection of life or property kills wildlife, that wildlife, despite subsection (3), 

remains the property of the government. 

2 (5) Despite anything in this Act, no right of action lies, and no right of compensation exists, against the government for 

death, personal injury or property damage caused by 

a) wildlife, or 

b) an animal that escapes or is released from captivity or is abandoned 

in British Columbia 

Trafficking in wildlife 

22 A person who traffics live wildlife or wildlife meat, except as authorized by regulation or a permit, commits an offence. 

Documents not transferable 

81 Except as authorized by regulation or as otherwise provided under this Act, a licence, permit or limited entry hunting 

authorization is not transferable, and a person commits an offence if the person 

a) allows his or her licence, permit or limited entry hunting authorization to be used by another person, or 

b) uses another person’s licence, permit or limited entry hunting authorization. 

Failure to pay fine 

85 (1) This section applies if a person 

a) fails to pay, within the time required by law, a fine imposed as a result of the person’s conviction for an offence 

under this Act or the Firearm Act, and 

b) has been served with notice of this section. 

(2) In the circumstances referred to in subsection (1), 

a) the person’s right to apply for or obtain a licence, permit or limited entry hunting authorization under this Act is 

suspended immediately and automatically on the failure to pay the fine, 


) all licences, permits and limited entry hunting authorizations issued to that person under this Act are cancelled 

immediately and automatically on the failure to pay the fine, and 

c) the person commits an offence if, before that fine is paid, the person 

i) applies for, or in any way obtains, a licence, permit or limited entry hunting authorization under this Act, 

or 

ii) does anything for which a licence, permit or limited entry hunting authorization under this Act is required. 

Production of licence or permit 

97 If a person who is required to hold a licence, permit or limited entry hunting authorization issued under this Act 

a) fails to produce it for inspection to an officer on request, or 

b) fails or refuses to state his or her name and address to an officer on request, 

the person commits an offence. 

REGULATIONS 

This excerpt from the Permit Regulation, made under the Wildlife Act, is relevant: 

8 A person who holds a permit under the Act or the Permit Regulation commits an offence if he or she fails to comply 

with a term of the permit. 


APPENDIX C 

RECORD OF WILDLIFE HUNTED, TRAPPED OR KILLED 


# The permit holder MUST maintain an accurate up-to-date record. 

# The permit holder MUST submit the original copy of this report to the Permit and Authorization Service Bureau within 21 

days of the permit’s expiry or annually as indicated in “Appendix A – Terms of Permit – Reporting Requirements” of this 

permit. 

# The permit holder must produce a copy of this record on the demand of an officer 

Common name of 

wildlife 

Location where 

wildlife was taken 

Date wildlife was 

hunted, trapped 

or killed 

*If more room is required, please use a sheet of blank paper 

Sex and 

age class 

of wildlife 

Bands or 

tags on 

wildlife 

Description of all nests, 

dams or other structures 

destroyed or removed 

_________________________________ _________________________ 

Signature of Permit Holder Date 

Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations 

Permit and Authorization Service Bureau 

PO Box 9372 Stn Prov Govt 

Victoria, BC V8W 9M3 


May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 


REVIEW 

APPENDIX D 

Summary Data Tables – Fish, Amphibian, Bird Surveys

FISHERIES DATA SUMMARIES 

APPENDIX D 

Data Summary from 2011 Surveys 

Table 1: Location (Universal Transverse Mercator, UTM, Coordinates), Length, and Number of 

Electrofishing (EF) Passes Conducted at Each of the Sample Sites on the Four Study Creeks. 

Creek Site Zone Easting Northing 

February 1, 2012 

Project No. 1114920016-005-R-Rev0 1/14 

Length 

(m) 

# EF 

Passes 

Temp. 

(°C) 

Six Mile SM1 10 474658 6163387 100 1 12.0 medium 



Lamonti LAM1 10 475666 6161941 106.8 2 6.5 medium 

Lamonti LAM2 10 475378 6161967 100 2 8.0 medium 

Lamonti LAM1os 10 475453 6161937 124 1 9.0 medium 

Factor Ross FR4 10 395312 6275353 132 2 7.0 medium 

Factor Ross FR1os 10 395371 6275647 125 2 7.0 medium 

Ole OLE1 10 405515 6257807 106 2 6.0 medium 

Ole OLE2 10 405685 6257701 111 2 6.5 medium 

Table 2: Catches of Bull Trout (BT), Mountain Whitefish (MW), and Rainbow Trout (RB) by Electrofishing 

Pass in Each Sample Site and Creek. 

Creek Site 

Number of fish caught and observed (combined) 

BT MW RB 

pass1 pass2 pass1 pass2 pass1 pass2 

Six Mile SM1 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 

SM2 0 0 0 0 3 1 

SM3 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Lamonti LAM1 0 0 2 0 3 0 

LAM2 0 0 0 0 1 0 

LAM1os 0 n/a 0 n/a 0 n/a 

Factor Ross FR4 0 0 5 2 0 0 

FR1os 0 0 4 4 0 0 

Ole OLE1 2 0 0 0 0 0 

OLE2 1 0 3 5 0 0 

Flow

APPENDIX D 


Table 3: Lengths, Weights, and Species of all Fish Caught During Electrofishing Surveys by Habitat Type, Site and Creek. 

Date Creek Site 

EF 

Pass 

Fish # 

Habitat 

Unit # 



Habitat 

Type 

* Fork 

Caught/Obs. Species 

Length 

Weight 

Aug 9 , 2011 Six Mile SM2 1 1 1 Riffle Caught MW 165 160 Y 

Aug 9 , 2011 Six Mile SM2 1 2 1 Riffle Observed RB 40 




Aug 10, 2011 Six Mile SM1 1 1 1 Riffle Observed UNID 40 

Aug 10, 2011 Six Mile SM3 1 1 1 Riffle Caught CAS 61 1.4 N 

Aug 10, 2011 Six Mile SM3 2 1 1 Riffle Caught CAS 95 16 N 

Aug 11, 2011 Lamonti LAM2 1 1 2 Pool Caught RB 104 167 N 

Aug 11, 2011 Lamonti LAM2 1 2 1 Riffle Observed CC 

Aug 11, 2011 Lamonti LAM2 2 3 2 Pool Caught CC 54 4 N 

Aug 12, 2011 Lamonti LAM1 1 1 1 Riffle Caught MW 159 47 N 


Aug 12, 2011 Lamonti LAM1 1 3 4 Pool Caught MW 160 45 N 



Aug 12, 2011 Lamonti LAM1 1 6 2 Pool Observed RB 

Aug 12, 2011 Lamonti LAM1 2 7 2 Pool Observed CC 

Aug 14, 2011 Factor Ross FR1OS 1 1 4 Rapid Caught MW 138 22 N 

Aug 14, 2011 Factor Ross FR1OS 1 2 3 Pool Caught MW 214 91 Y 

Aug 14, 2011 Factor Ross FR1OS 1 3 1 Riffle Caught MW 330 253 Y 

Scale 

Sample


APPENDIX D 


EF 

Pass 

Fish # 

Habitat 

Unit # 



Habitat 

Type 

* Fork 


Length 

Aug 14, 2011 Factor Ross FR1OS 1 4 3 Pool Observed MW 70 

Weight 

Aug 14, 2011 Factor Ross FR1OS 2 5 3 Pool Caught MW 144 27 N 


Aug 14, 2011 Factor Ross FR1OS 2 7 2 Rapid Observed MW 330 

Aug 14, 2011 Factor Ross FR1OS 2 8 1 Riffle Caught CC N 

Aug 14, 2011 Factor Ross FR1OS 2 9 2 Rapid Observed CC 


Aug 15, 2011 Factor Ross FR4 1 1 1 Riffle Caught MW 154 34 N 

Aug 15, 2011 Factor Ross FR4 1 2 1 Riffle Caught MW 205 81 Y 

Aug 15, 2011 Factor Ross FR4 1 3 2 Rapid Caught MW N 

Aug 15, 2011 Factor Ross FR4 1 4 1 Riffle Observed MW 

Aug 15, 2011 Factor Ross FR4 1 5 2 Rapid Observed MW 

Aug 15, 2011 Factor Ross FR4 1 6 1 Riffle Observed CC 

Aug 15, 2011 Factor Ross FR4 2 7 2 Rapid Caught MW 163 37 N 

Aug 15, 2011 Factor Ross FR4 2 8 2 Rapid Observed MW 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE1 1 1 4 Rapid Caught BT 144 19 N 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE1 1 2 4 Rapid Caught BT 107 17 N 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE1 1 3 1 Rapid Observed UNID 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE1 2 4 n/a n/a Observed BT 300-400 



Scale 

Sample


APPENDIX D 


EF 

Pass 

Fish # 

Habitat 

Unit # 



Habitat 

Type 

* Fork 


Length 

Weight 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 1 1 1 Riffle Caught MW 224 125 Y 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 1 2 2 Rapid Caught MW 199 75 N 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 1 3 2 Rapid Caught BT 61 2 N 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 1 4 1 Riffle Observed UNID 150 



Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 1 7 3 Riffle Observed CC 


Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 1 9 2 Rapid Observed MW 220 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 2 10 2 Rapid Caught MW 274 200 Y 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 2 11 1 Riffle Caught MW 181 56 N 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 2 12 2 Rapid Caught MW 176 51 N 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 2 13 3 Riffle Observed Trout sp. 50 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 2 14 3 Riffle Observed MW 150 

Aug 17, 2011 Ole OLE2 2 15 3 Riffle Observed MW 100 

* Species codes are defined as follows: Bull Trout (BT), Prickly Sculpin (CAS), Sculpin species (CC), Mountain Whitefish (MW), Rainbow Trout (RB), 

unidentified fish species (UNID) 

Scale 

Sample

AMPHIBIAN DATA SUMMARY 

APPENDIX D 


Table 4: Summary of Amphibian Survey Findings 

Location Site Date 

Search 

Area 

(m²) 

Search 

Period 

(min) 

Air 

temp 

(°C) 

Water 

temp 

(°C) 

Six Mile SA1 May 11, 2011 800 50 12 474773 6162544 

Six Mile SA2 May 11, 2011 500 30 2.5 474625 6162593 

Six Mile SA3 May 13, 2011 1600 60 474580 6163254 

Six Mile SA4 June 7, 2011 1800 75 11 474718 6162718 

Six Mile SA5 June 8, 2011 500 30 8 474580 6163254 

Six Mile SA6 Aug 9, 2011 900 90 31 17 474669 616829 

Six Mile SA7 Aug 11, 2011 1600 60 15 10 474695 6162855 



Easting Northing Habitat Features Sightings 

Small pool on mudflats where 

Six Mile Creek enters Six Mile Bay 

Small pool on mudflats where 

Six Mile Creek enters Six Mile Bay 

Wetland area on left bank of Six 

Mile Creek, mixture of lentic and 

lotic habitat (60:40) with sedges 

and pondweed cover 

Mouth of Six Mile Creek, previously 

wetted pools now dried up, 

remaining wetted area up-slope, 

searched farther north new habitat 

with higher water levels 

Wetland area on left bank of Six 

Mile Creek, mixture of lentic and 

lotic habitat (60:40) with sedges 

and pondweed cover 

Searched area upstream and 

downstream of SV1 mix of lentic 

and lotic habitat with small side 

channel with moderate shrub cover 

Small wetland area on left bank of 

Six Mile creek, mixture of lentic and 

lotic habitat, lots of sedge cover 

Long-Toed 

Salamander egg 

mass 

None 

None 

Adult Western 

Toad (76mm SVL, 

45g) 

None 

Adult Columbia 

Spotted Frog 

(36 SVL, 9.2g) 

Adult Columbia 

Spotted Frog 

(37 SVL, 12.1g) 

Wood Frog (could 

not catch) 

None


APPENDIX D 


Search 

Area 

(m²) 

Search 

Period 

(min) 

Air 

temp 

(°C) 

Water 

temp 

(°C) 

Lamonti LA1 May 13, 2011 1200 60 475712 6161955 

Lamonti LA2 June 7, 2011 400 30 475712 6161955 

Lamonti LA3 Aug 11, 2011 800 60 20 9 475733 6161929 

Lamonti LA4 Aug 12, 2011 800 60 16 7 475733 6161929 

Factor Ross FA1 May 14, 2011 2000 60 395389 6275959 

Factor Ross FA2 May 15, 2011 200 10 4 395235 6275308 



Factor Ross 

I1 

Adult 

May 17, 2011 395327 6275425 




Mix of slow lotic habitat along 

stream, side channels, small 

ephemerals and seeps, lots of 

large woody debris 

Previously wet areas now dried up 

and vegetated 

Searched upstream from GPS 

location along main creek area 

cobbly banks and backwater small 

pools 

Searched along both sides of 

Lamonti creek downstream from 

GPS location, along rocky banks 

and upper banks with small pools 

from seepage towards creek, lots 

of large woody debris 

Wet mudflats with areas of lentic 

and slow lotic water connected to 

the stream, also a few isolated 

pools, little vegetation, fine sandy 

and organic substrate 

Small pond from road seep and 

small ephemeral channel (currently 

dry) 

Side channel on right bank of 

Factor Ross, a mix of lotic and 

lentic habitat and areas with 

organic substrate 

Mix of herb dominated grasses and 

sedge, mudflats and shrubs, very 

little water, few small isolated 

pools, lots of coarse woody debris 

Approximately 5m from Factor 

Ross creek, lots of fallen large 

None 

None 

Juvenile Western 

Toad (29mm SVL, 

5g) 

None 

None 

None 

None 

None 

Found adult 

Western Toad


West 

ern 

Toad 

APPENDIX D 


Search 

Area 

(m²) 

Search 

Period 

(min) 

Air 

temp 

(°C) 

Water 

temp 

(°C) 

Factor Ross FA5 Aug 15, 2011 400 30 11 6 395235 6275308 

Ole OA1 May 16, 2011 600 60 12 3 405816 6257701 

Ole OA2 May 16, 2011 300 60 4 405393 6257899 

Ole 

I2 

Wood 

Frog 

Egg 

Mass 

May 16, 2011 27 20 404730 6257579 




woody debris (40mm SVL) 

emerging from top 

of fallen tree 

rootwad ~2m off 

the ground 

Small pond from road seep and 

small ephemeral channel (now 

flowing), also searched upland None 

surrounding area and flipped over 

large woody debris 


Toad - 300mm SVL 



Mouth of Ole Creek on left bank, 

shrub carr habitat with lots of 

shrubs and leaf litter, in wet organic 

soils with grass and coarse woody 

debris cover 

Mix of small pools and side channel 

habitat fed from stream, lots of 

coarse woody debris 

Small pool off west side of Mainline 

FSR, found egg mass in standing 

water and heard wood frog calling 

Ole OA3 Aug 16, 2011 400 30 13 6.5 405807 6257698 Searched area where Ole Creek None 











Wood Frog egg 

mass


Ole 

I3 

Adult 

West 

ern 

Toad 

APPENDIX D 


Search 

Area 

(m²) 

Search 

Period 

(min) 

Air 

temp 

(°C) 

Water 

temp 

(°C) 

Aug 17, 2011 404814 6257734 




flows out into reservoir, lots of 

shrub cover (Salix sp.), small 

sections of impounded water due to 

abundant log debris at mouth of 

creek 

Forested upland ~100m away from 

Ole creek on left bank 

Adult Western 

Toad (120mm SVL)

APPENDIX D 


BREEDING BIRD POINT COUNT DATA SUMMARY AND INCIDENTAL OBSERVATIONS 

Table 5: Cumulative Bird Observations 2011 Field Season 

Common 

Name 

American 

Dipper 

Scientific Name Code 

Cinclus 

mexicanus 

BC 

List 



COSEWIC SARA Six Mile Lamonti 

AMDI Yellow - - Yes 

Factor 

Ross 

American Pipit Anthus rubescens AMPI Yellow - - Yes Yes Yes Yes 

American 

Redstart 

Setophaga ruticilla AMRE Yellow - - Yes Yes Yes 

American Robin Turdus 

American 

migratorius 

AMRO Yellow - - Yes 

Three-Toed 

Woodpecker 

Picoides dorsalis TTWO Yellow - - Yes 

American Tree 

Sparrow 

Spizella arborea ATSP Yellow - - 

Bald Eagle 

Haliaeetus 

leucocephalus 

BAEA Yellow NAR - Yes Yes Yes 

Barrow's 

Goldeneye 

Belted 

Kingfisher 

Black-Backed 

Woodpecker 

Black-Capped 

Chickadee 

Bonaparte's 

Gull 

Broad-Winged 

Hawk 

Bucephala 

islandica 

Megaceryle 

alcyon 

Ole Breeding Evidence 

Pair - observed near Factor 

Ross + juvenile 

BAGO Yellow - - Yes 2 Pairs - near Factor Ross 

BEKI Yellow - - Yes Yes Yes 

Picoides arcticus BBWO Yellow - - Yes 

Poecile atricapillus BCCH Yellow - - Yes 

Chroicocephalus 

philadelphia 

BOGU Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Buteo platypterus BWHA Blue - - Yes 

Observed from road near Ole 

Creek

Common 

Name 

APPENDIX D 




List 




Factor 

Ross 


Brown Creeper Certhia americana BRCR Yellow - - 

Canada Goose 

Branta canadensis 

CAGO Yellow - - Yes Yes Pair - Lamonti Creek area 

Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla 

cedrorum 

CEWA Yellow - - Yes 

Chipping 

Sparrow 

Spizella passerina CHSP Yellow - - Yes 

Common 

Goldeneye 

Bucephala 

clangula 

COGO Yellow - - 

Common Loon Gavia immer COLO Yellow NAR - Yes Yes 

Common 

Merganser 

Mergus 

merganser 

COME Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Common Raven Corvus corax CORA Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Cooper's Hawk Accipiter cooperii COHA Yellow NAR - Yes 

Dark-Eyed 

Junco 

Junco hyemalis DEJU Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Dusky 

Flycatcher 

Empidonax 

oberholseri 

DUFL Yellow - - 

Fox Sparrow 

Golden- 

Passerella iliaca FOSP Yellow - - Yes 

Crowned 

Kinglet 

Regulus satrapa GCKI Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Gray Jay 

Perisoreus 

canadensis 

GRJA Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Greater 

Yellowlegs 

Tringa 

melanoleuca 

GRYE Yellow - - Yes 

Green-Winged 

Teal 

Anas crecca GWTE Yellow - - Yes Yes Yes 

Pair - Six Mile Bay 

campground 


campground

Common 

Name 

Hairy 

Woodpecker 

Hammond's 

Flycatcher 

Harlequin Duck 

Mountain 

Chickadee 

APPENDIX D 




List 




Picoides villosus HAWO Yellow - - Yes 

Empidonax 

hammondii 

Histrionicus 

histrionicus 

Factor 

Ross 

HAFL Yellow - - Yes Yes Yes 

HADU Yellow - - Yes 

Poecile gambeli MOCH Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus NOFL Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Northern 

Rough-Winged 

Swallow 

Northern Saw- 

Whet Owl 

Northern 

Waterthrush 

Orange- 

Crowned 

Warbler 

Stelgidopteryx 

serripennis 

NRWS Yellow - - Yes 

Aegolius acadicus NSWO Yellow - - Yes 

Parkesia 

noveboracensis 

Oreothlypis celata 

NOWA Yellow - - Yes Yes 

OCWA Yellow - - Yes 

Osprey Pandion haliaetus OSPR Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Ovenbird 

Pileated 

Woodpecker 

Seiurus 

aurocapilla 

Dryocopus 

pileatus 

OVEN Yellow - - Yes Yes 

PIWO Yellow - - Yes 

Pine Siskin Spinus pinus PISI Yellow - - Yes Yes 


Singing Males - Six Mile + 

Lamonti 

Nest excavation - on snag 

near Six Mile Creek, mating 

pair Six Mile, Pair into cavity in 

snag at mouth of Ole 

Singing Male - Factor Ross 

campground 

Nest + Juveniles at Six Mile 

Bay

Common 

Name 

Purple Finch 

Red-Breasted 

Nuthatch 

Red-Tailed 

Hawk (Harlan's) 

Red-Throated 

Loon 

Ruby-Crowned 

Kinglet 

APPENDIX D 



Carpodacus 

purpureus 


List 




PUFI Yellow - - Yes 

Sitta canadensis RBNU Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Buteo jamaicensis RTHA Yellow NAR - 

Gavia stellata RTLO Yellow - - 

Regulus calendula RCKI Yellow - - Yes Yes Yes 

Factor 

Ross 

Ruffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus RUGR Yellow - - Yes Yes Yes 

Rufous 

Hummingbird 

Selasphorus rufus RUHU Yellow - - 

Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis SHCR Yellow NAR - 

Savannah 

Sparrow 

Passerculus 

sandwichensis 

SASP Yellow - - Yes Yes 


Singing Male - Six Mile Bay 

campground 


campground 

Drumming male - Factor Ross 

campground 


campground + Lamonti 

Say's Phoebe Sayornis saya SAPH Yellow - - Yes Pair - Factor Ross 

Sharp-Shinned 

Hawk 

Accipiter striatus SSHA Yellow NAR - Yes 

Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia SOSP Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Spotted 

Sandpiper 

Actitis macularius SPSA Yellow - - Yes 

Junvenile observed (Aug 

2011) along Six Mile Creek 

with adult 

Surf Scoter 

Melanitta 

perspicillata 

SUSC Blue - - Yes 

Swainson's 

Thrush 

Catharus 

ustulatus 

SWTH Yellow - -

Common 

Name 

Tennessee 

Warbler 

Townsend's 

Solitaire 

Tree Swallow 

APPENDIX D 



Oreothlypis 

peregrina 

Myadestes 

townsendii 

Tachycineta 

bicolor 


List 




TEWA Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Factor 

Ross 

TOSO Yellow - - Yes 

TRSW Yellow - - Yes 

Varied Thrush Ixoreus naevius VATH Yellow - - Yes 

Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus WAVI Yellow - - Yes 

White-Crowned 

Sparrow 

Zonotrichia 

leucophrys 

WCSP Yellow - - Yes Yes 

White-Throated 

Sparrow 

Zonotrichia 

albicollis 

WTSP Yellow - - Yes Yes 

White-Winged 

Scoter 

Melanitta fusca WWSC Yellow - - Yes 

Wilson's Snipe Gallinago delicata WISN Yellow - - 

Wilson's 

Warbler 

Winter Wren 

(Pacific Wren) 

Yellow Warbler 

Yellow-Bellied 

Sapsucker 

Yellow-Rumped 

Warbler 


Multiple pairs examining 

nesting cavities in Ole Creek 

bay 


campground 


campground 

Wilsonia pusilla WIWA Yellow - - Yes Yes Yes Pair - observed on Lamonti 

Troglodytes 

troglodytes 

Dendroica 

petechia 

Sphyrapicus 

varius 

Dendroica 

coronata 

PAWR Yellow - - Yes Yes Yes 

YEWA Yellow - - Yes 

YBSA Yellow - - Yes Yes 

YRWA Yellow - - Yes Yes 

Carrying nesting material - Six 

Mile 


campground

APPENDIX D 


Table 6: Incidental Wildlife Observations 2011 Field Season 

Observation Location Date 

Grey Wolf (Canis lupus) tracks Six Mile Bay mudflats May 9 to 18, 2011 

Adult Moose (Alces alces) Approximately 400m up Lamonti Creek May 15, 2011 

Black Bear (Ursus americanus) tracks Along Six Mile Creek banks August 9, 2011 

Black Bear (mother and 2 cubs) Near bridge at Ole Creek May 2011 

Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos) tracks At the mouth of Ole Creek along mudflats May 16, 2011 

Mustelid tracks In the mudflats at Factor Ross Creek May 14, 2011 

Coyote (Canis latrans) tracks Numerous locations at each creek May, Aug 2011 

Snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus) tracks Numerous locations at each creek May, Aug 2011 

Fox (Vulpes vulpes) tracks Near mouth of Factor Ross Creek May 2011 

Red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) sightings Numerous locations at each creek May, Aug 2011 

Deer (Odocoileus sp.) tracks Numerous locations at each creek May, Aug 2011 

Voles (Microtus sp.) sightings Numerous locations at each creek May, Aug 2011 

n:\active\2011\1492\11-1492-0016 williston\deliverables\wp\final 2011 report 22may_12\1114920016-r-rev0-2000-appendix d - data summary tables 22may_12.docx 


Project No. 1114920016-005-R-Rev0 14/14

APPENDIX E 

Fish Field Data Forms 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 


REVIEW

APPENDIX F 

Fish Site Cards 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 


REVIEW

APPENDIX G 

Breeding Bird Point Count Forms 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 


REVIEW

APPENDIX H 

Vegetation Survey Forms 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 


REVIEW

APPENDIX I 

R Program Code 

May 22, 2012 

Report No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 


REVIEW

# File: WillstonTribsvs2.R 

APPENDIX I 

R Code 

# Purpose: GRTS survey designs for Williston tributaries 

# Programmers: Tony Olsen and Tom Kincaid original code modified by Dschmidt 

# Date: 12 January, 2011 

# Last Modified: 12 January 2011 

#1/12/2011 3:05:08 PM 

# Load the spsurvey library 

library(spsurvey) 

# Read the attribute table from the shapefile 

att

APPENDIX I 

R Code 

# Print the initial six lines of the survey design 

cat("\nThe initial lines of the survey design follow:\n\n") 

print(head(Equalsites@data)) 

cat("\n") 

# Print the survey design summary 

cat("\nThe survey design summary follows:\n\n") 

print(dsgnsum(Equalsites)) 

n:\active\2011\1492\11-1492-0016 williston\deliverables\wp\final 2011 report 22may_12\1114920016-r-rev0-2000-appendix i r codes 22may_12.docx 

May 22, 2012 

Reference No. 1114920016-R-Rev0-2000 2/2

Golder Associates Ltd. 

220 - 1755 Springfield Road 

Kelowna, British Columbia, V1Y 5V5 

Canada 

T: +1 (250) 860 8424

GMSMON-17 WILLISTON RESERVOIR TRIBUTARY - BC Hydro

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?