Appendix A

Millard/Piercy Watershed Stewards’
Assessment and Monitoring Program

Prepared by Warren Fleenor and Angela Smailes

with the Millard/Piercy Watershed Stewards

November, 2000

Table of Contents:

Introduction:......

A. Land-Use and Cover Map......

B. Fish Use......

C. Hydrology......

D. Fish Habitat......

E. Biodiversity......

F. Water Quality......

G. Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory...... 26

______

Tables and Figures:

Table 1. Impervious Areas in hectares and percentage of basin in M/PW...... 4

Table 2. Total number of fish captured by species in Millard/Piercy outmigration trap during May and

June 1999 and 2000.......

Figure 1. Graph showing coho smolt migration from the Millard/Piercy Watershed in May-June 2000....

Figure 2. Coho density at seven sites in the Millard Piercy Watershed......

Figure 3. Map of the Stewards’ 1999 Spawner Assessment Results.......

Figure 4. Fish presence and barriers to fish in the Millard/Piercy Watershed.......

Figure 5. Seasonal Flows of the Millard/Piercy Watershed 1999.......

Figure 6. Creek flow in Millard Creek at two sites. The flows were measured using a flume.......

Figure 7. Low flow measurements of streams in the Millard/Piercy Watershed arranged by discharge....

Figure 8. Depth of water in a residential well on Cumberland Rd. since May 1991.......

Figure 9. Bird species that are at risk in different areas in the watershed........

Figure 10. Average and maximum stream temperatures in Millard and Piercy Creeks between May 30

and September 26, 1999.......

Figure 11. Dissolved oxygen and oxygen saturation at site 154 in Piercy Creek for the period December

1996 to January 2000.......

Introduction:

The Assessment and Monitoring Program informs the planning process. By studying specific land-use, biological, hydrological, and geomorphological characteristics in the watershed, we can prescribe the best management initiatives for the watershed. As well, the ongoing assessment and monitoring of the watershed lets us measure the effectiveness of any future projects and determine the impacts of any land use changes that will occur in the watershed. Because the majority of these programs are volunteer-driven, it is also an excellent way to expand public involvement, education and awareness.

The Stewards assessment and monitoring program can be broken down into the following five major categories: A) Mapping/Land-use; B) Fish Use; C) Hydrology; D) Fish Habitat;

E) Biodiversity, F) Water Quality, and G) Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory. Detailed descriptions and the results of the Assessment and Monitoring Program are outlined below:

A. Land-Use and Cover Map

Rationale:

A watershed map is a portable, visual reference for the presentation, analysis and discussion of the watershed. It is therefore a crucial and obvious first step in the formulation of any watershed plan. As well, the Steward’s Land Use and Cover Map was proposed to determine the area of natural cover and impervious surfaces in the watershed. This was seen as important initial information to obtain in a watershed where urbanization is taking place. Many studies show that the ability of salmonids to survive becomes severely limited in watersheds with effective impervious surfaces in excess of 10% of the total area in the watershed; beyond 20% they cannot survive at all (Impervious surfaces article). The results of this map are intended to assess the severity of problems related to urban development in the watershed and to provide direction for future research and action.

Methods:

The majority of the information required to create the land-use and cover map of the Millard/Piercy Watershed (See attached map in pdf format) was gathered through Project Watershed’s Watershed Mapping and Inventory Project in 1998-99. Watershed Inventory Technicians used Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to accurately map the streams and wetlands in a computer-based format. This established a base map with accurate stream lines, wetland locations, and watershed boundary. As the technicians walked the streams, they also noted the presence of fish, some fish habitat data, obstructions to fish passage, riparian vegetation, the shape and slope of the channel, and any other relevant information.

Using photogrammetry (computer generation using infrared waves from colour aerial photos), Consultant Mike Doknjas combined the base map with 1:5000 colour air photos to create the landuse map. The land-use and cover categories are: Residential, Farm, Brush, Immature Forest (<15 yrs), Deciduous Forest, Coniferous Forest, Commercial Activity, Surface Water, Impermeable Surfaces, and Ponds.

Results:

The resulting Land Use/Cover Map has proven to be an invaluable tool for the presentation, analysis, and discussion of the Millard/Piercy Watershed. It provides an immediate picture of the spatial layout and land use in the watershed. Table 1 shows the impervious surface area in total hectares and as a percentage into six different basins. These basins are broken down as follows: Piercy City - consists of the drainage area of the City of Courtenay emptying into Willemar Ditch; Piercy Rural - the drainage area of Piercy Basin excluding the City of Courtenay; Piercy Watershed - the drainage area of the entire Piercy Basin (includes Piercy City basin); Millard Watershed - the Millard Creek Basin, and; Total Area - the entire watershed. Please note that the blue dashed line on the map separates Millard and Piercy Watershed.

Basin / Total Area / Millard Watershed / Piercy Watershed / Piercy Rural / Piercy City
Total Basin Area / 1305 ha / 367 ha / 938 ha / 840 ha / 98 ha
Imp. Surface
(ha/basin%) / 93.8ha/ 7.19 % / 15.8 ha / 4.3 % / 78 ha / 8.31 % / 47.6ha/ 6.7% / 30.4 ha /30.99%

Table 1. Total Impervious Areas in hectares and as a per-basin percentage in the M/PW

These maps have also been used to update the Regional District of Comox Strathcona’s Sensitive Habitat Atlas, and the map libraries of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Ministry of Environment Lands and Parks.

Discussion:

Of most concern is the total impervious surface for Piercy Watershed. The percentage of paved and roofed surfaces, 8.31 per cent of that basin, is approaching the recommended 10 percent maximum. Increased impervious surfaces would affect an important stretch of Piercy Mainstem. This finding may have implications for future development in Piercy Basin in terms of the storm drain infrastructure and protection required to ensure that stream flows are maintained at a level viable for salmon. Some work has been conducted by the City of Courtenay for their West Courtenay Area Plan to determine leave strips and soil infiltration capacity. Further work needs to be carried out to determine flow regimes for the entire basin, and the potential impact of future upstream land use. Creation of an Integrated Stormwater Management Plan is underway to address these issues.

B. Fish Use

The Stewards are studying the ways that fish (particularly salmonid species) use the watershed throughout their different life stages. Knowing where and when fish are using the watershed is imperative to effective ecosystem management.The main components of this program are; 1) Smolt Fence; 2) Fall Fry Assessment; 3) Spawner Assessment; and 4) Fish Presence/Barriers to Fish.

1. Smolt Fence

Rationale:

The main objective of the Smolt Fence program is to enumerate the total number of coho smolts that migrate out of the Millard/Piercy system each year. As well, the results of the fish fence count provide information that will serve many valuable functions. They will:

  • provide baseline data to measure the effectiveness of watershed management initiatives such

as stream enhancement;

  • provide baseline data to measure the effects of future land-use changes;
  • identify different species of salmonids that live in the streams;
  • provide an idea as to the total number of fish the watershed can support;
  • further our understanding of the interaction of hatchery and wild stocks;
  • increase our knowledge about the level of competition for food and habitat between juvenile salmonids in the watershed. This will help us determine, in conjunction with Fry Assessment, what an “ideal” number of fish to be outplanted might be.

In addition to providing valuable data, the fish fence is an excellent public outreach tool.

Methods:

The smolt fence is a temporary structure that spans the width of lower Millard Creek. Out-migrating smolts are held in a temporary screened enclosure before being identified by species, counted and released downstream twice a day by volunteers. Operating between early May and late June, it is built, maintained, and operated by community volunteers. The lengths of the smolts were recorded once weekly during the morning monitoring session.

Results:

In 1999, a total of 5097 coho smolts and 354 trout species (cutthroat and steelhead) were captured during the sampling period (Table 1). For the year 2000, the total number of coho smolts migrating out of the watershed was 15,808, with 487 trout species counted as well.

Discussion:

Based on spawning coho enumerations completed by DFO and the number of outplanted hatchery coho released into the system, freshwater survival of coho smolts in the Millard/Piercy Watershed was below the expected average in 1999 (Fleenor & Komori, 1999). Likely causes include attributable to negative impacts associated with urban, agricultural, and industrial development in the watershed. These impacts include channelization of streams, riparian degradation, decreased rearing habitat, and changes in the hydrological regime in the watershed. The dramatic increase in the number of coho smolts enumerated in 2000 is a result of large returns of adult spawners in 1998. In subsequent years, as the body of data from this project grows, the insights about the freshwater survival of coho, the influence of spawner returns on smolt production, and the salmonid carrying capacity of the watershed will increase through comparative analysis of specific parameters (weather, restoration, water quality, creek flows) against the number of smolts produced from the watershed.

As an outreach tool to increase public commitment and education with respect to community watershed stewardship, this type of hands-on involvement, especially the handling of fish, generates a considerable amount of excitement and interest. The number of volunteers involved with the smolt fence project in 1999 was 32; the number in 2000 was 38. These are the first two years for the Millard/Piercy Smolt Fence. The Stewards will continue to build on this success in subsequent years through the recruitment of more public involvement with the project and through the publication of the results in the local press.

Species / 1999 / 2000
Coho salmon
Oncorhyncus kisutch / 5,097 / 15,808
Cutthroat trout/
Steelhead/Rainbow Trout
O. clarki/ O. mykiss / 354 / 487
Sculpins / 313 / 231
Sticklebacks / 5 / 5
3 frogs, 2 muskrats,
2 eels / 12 eels, 2 frogs

Table 2. Total number of fish captured by species in Millard/Piercy outmigration trap during May and June 1999 and 2000.

For a more detailed account of the Millard/Piercy Stewards fish fence program, please see Millard/Piercy Watershed Stewards Smolt Outmigration Assessment, Fish Fence Report, May-June 1999, by Warren Fleenor and Violet Komori.

Recommendations:

1. Continue operation of smolt enumeration fence. The results from these years provide the first of several years of data necessary to identify freshwater and marine survival rates as well as the success of future management decisions.;

2. Mark all hatchery-reared coho fry released in the watershed so that outmigrating smolts can be identified as being either hatchery or wild stock.;

3. Collect species, condition and length data on trout species. Ensure that at least one volunteer per crew can accurately identify the difference between cutthroat and rainbow smolts.;

4. Continue training and education with interested volunteers, local businesses, local residents and community groups.


Figure 1. Graph showing coho smolt migration from the Millard/Piercy Watershed in May-June 2000.

2. Fall Fry Assessment

Rationale:

For watershed management, understanding the distribution (and to a lesser extent the relative size) of juvenile salmonids in the watershed is crucial. The Stewards’ Fall Fry Assessment is designed to help meet this objective. The information we gain from this program will help us:

  • iIdentify areas that are utilized by salmonids and fry during low flows;.
  • mMeasure the impacts of the watershed management plan, or any land-use changes in the watershed;.
  • dDetermine the extent to which different stream reaches are accessible to fish;.
  • dDetermine whether there are “too many” or “not enough” juvenile salmonids using the watershed. The size distribution of the fry can help tell us if there are enough “fish friendly" locations in the watershed for fish to survive and if we are releasing too many fish from the hatchery;.
  • uUnderstand the interaction between hatchery-raised salmonids and those fish that were born naturally in streams;.
  • iInvolve more people in stewardship activities and programs.

Methods:

Volunteers completed pole and beach seine “sets” of repeated effort in sealed-off pools and runs at selected sites in the watershed during low flow conditions (early fall). Captured fish were enumerated by species, and their lengths were recorded. Based on diminishing returns per

effort of fishing, the total number of fish in the site were estimated. The surface area of the habitat was also measured, thus enabling an estimation of the density and size distribution of fish in specific reaches during low flow periods.

Results:

Density estimates and length distributions for both cutthroat and coho were completed for seven sites in the watershed (Figure. 2). Due to the fact that this is the first year of this program, there is not enough data for an in-depth analysis as of yet. However, the densities observed at sites FF1 (20.37 fish/sq.m) and FF3 (15.2 fish/sq.m) were well above expected averages (Simpson, pers. comm) and may indicate stranded populations of fish due to limited access related to low flow conditions. There were no instances of skewd length distributions.

Figure 2. Coho density at seven sites in the Millard Piercy Watershed

Recommendations:

1. Continue the Fall Fry Assessment program. The results from this year provide the first of several years of data necessary to characterize juvenile salmonid activity in the watershed.

2. Mark all hatchery-reared coho fry released in the watershed so that at hatchery-released

hatchery-released fry can be differentiated from naturally born fry. In the year 2001, the Stewards will be working with the Kiwanis Fish Hatchery to mark all of the young “hatchery” fry that are released into the watershed. This will help us determine the relative survival (as counted at the Smolt Fence), size, and dispersal of the two different types of juvenile fish in the system.

3. Expand the number of fall fry monitoring sites to provide a more complete picture of the status of juvenile salmonids in the watershed during the low flow period.

4. Continue training and education with interested volunteers, local businesses, local residents and community groups.

3. Spawner Assessment

Rationale:

The main objective of this program is to identify the areas used by spawning salmon, particularly coho. The information we gain will enable us to prescribe more informed watershed land-use planning and fisheries management strategies. It will also tell us where fish are not spawning, helping us identify possible barriers to fish or habitat limitations. Finally, “spawner spotting” is great fun for volunteers and landowners in the watershed; it helps the Stewards encourage volunteer involvement and increase public awareness about fish in the watershed.

Methods:

From October to late December, volunteers walked designated creek reaches twice a week with a pole and “spooked” out the adults from under debris and bank overhangs. As they walked, they counted live and dead salmon as well as redds (the distinct gravel “nests” that salmon build to lay their eggs in). Due to the difficulties associated with enumerating spawning coho salmon, this program is a simple presence/absence type of assessment. Technicians from DFO’s Coho Program- Stock Assessment Division have performed intensive assessments of returning spawners in Millard Creek Mainstem for 1998 and 1999.

Results:

Returns of adult coho, as estimated in Millard Creek up to Lockwell Falls by DFO technicians was 179 for 1998, and 64 in 1999 (K. Simpson, pers. comm 1999). As well, M/P volunteers confirmed coho spawning activity in four reaches during the coho spawning season of 1999: i) Trib 1 between River Meadows Farm and the Comox Logging Rd; ii) the new VIHP mitigation channel at the intersection of Piercy Creek and the South Courtenay Connector; iii) Piercy Mainstem @ 20th St.; and iv) Piercy Mainstem between Cumberland and Arden Rd. (Figure. 3). In 1998 (the year of strong coho returns throughout eastern Vancouver Island), SHIM mapping technicians from Project Watershed observed coho in Piercy Mainstem up to Conrad Rd; in Trib 6 up to the Comox Logging Rd.; and in Trib 1 from River Meadows Farms up to the Tobacca Farm.