Assessing Wild Brook Trout Populations in NH as part of the Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture-A Fish Habitat Partnership (EBTJV-FHP) and

Transcription

1 Assessing Wild Brook Trout Populations in NH as part of the Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture-A Fish Habitat Partnership (EBTJV-FHP) and Brook Trout Migration in the Swift Diamond River-A Summary Dianne Timmins, Coldwater Fisheries Biologist

2 EBTJV-FHP Identified Priorities Protection Assessment Enhancement and Restoration Recreational Fishing Outreach j

3 Distribution, Status and Perturbations to brook trout within the eastern United States Mark Hudy and Teresa M. Thieling 2005

4 Predictive Map developed for the EBTJV-FHP Objective: To fill in the unknowns More details at: easternbrooktrout.org State specific strategies to prioritize policy changes, conservation, and restoration

5 Regional Predictive Assessment Model (Thieling 2006) This model used existing brook trout data and thresholds of landuse and landscape attributes to predict population status throughout the entire range of the species. % of forested and agricultural land Rates of atmospheric deposition Road density Latitude Subwatershed Categories developed by Thieling (2006) Predicted Reduced Predicted Intact Predicted Extirpated Initial surveys to test this model suggested that a more state specific model may be more accurate

6 USGS Catchments Finer-sized scale: Land use and landscape (physical) data is summarized at this scale already Developed by USGS and EPA as a water quality model to assess TMDLs and other nutrient inputs Summarize/predict brook trout distrib at subwatershed level Better track restoration and conservation efforts

7 Using Existing Data for a Predictive Model West Branch Brook Watershed (Campton, Ellsworth, Rumney, Thornton, Warren) Brook Trout Present Catchment Occupied Brook Trout Not Detected Catchment Unoccupied 7 of the 9 catchments sampled contained wild brook trout Suggests watershed should be classified as intact Total land and water area (mi 2 ) %Forested and forest type (mi 2 ) %Farmland %Urban %Suburban Wetland (mi 2 ) Human population and density Developed land (acres) Mean Slope Mean permeability Reference catchment Cumulative index score Specific fish data Specific fish habitat data (Y or N)

8 STREAM CORRIDOR SURVEY Stream Name: County: Town: Investigators: Site (description): GPS Location Latitude (ex: N ) Longitude (ex : W ) Accur. Error (ex. 16 ) Position in Reach: (Upstream or Downstream) Start stream End stream GPS Map Datum: Always WGS84 Site or Map Number (if applicable): Date: Time: Total length of sample area: Total time of shocking (seconds): Weather in past 24 hours: Storm (heavy rain) Rain (steady rain) Showers (intermittent rain) Overcast Clear/ Partly Sunny Weather now: Storm (heavy rain) Rain (steady rain) Showers (intermittent rain) Overcast Clear/ Partly Sunny

9 In-Stream Characteristics PHYSICAL CHARACTERIZATION 1. Check which stream habitats are present: (You can check more than 1 habitat) Pool(s) Riffle(s) Run(s) Cascad e( s) Rapid(s) Deadwater(s) Other 2. Nature of particles in the stream bottom at site 0% 1-10% 11-49% >50% Silt/Clay/Mud Sand (up to 0.3" in diam.) Pea Gravel ( in diam.) Gravel ( " in diam.) Cobble (2.5-10" in diam.) Rubble (10 20 in diam.) Boulder (over 20" in diam.) Bedrock (solid) 3. Pick the category that best describes the extent to which gravel, cobbles, and boulde rs on the stream bott om are embedded (covered by) in silt, sand, or mud. Not embedded (0-5%) Somewhat (5-25%) Halfway (50%) Mostly embedded (75%) Completely (100%) 4. Presence of logs or large woody debris in stream Non e Few Many Plentiful Streambank and Channel Characteristics 9. (a) Average depth of run(s): < 1 ft 1-2 ft > 2 ft (b) Average depth of pool(s): < 1 ft 1-2 ft > 2 ft (c ) Number of pool(s) >2 ft dee p: (d) Avg. distance between pools: ft 10. Average width of stream channel: feet measured estimated 11. Stream velocity: stagnant low moderate high 12. Pick the description that best fits the shape of the stream banks and the channel. (a) Stream bank: Ver tical/un der cut Steeply sloping (> 30 ) Gradual/no slope (< 30 ) (b) Extent of artificial bank modifications: Bank 0-25% covered Bank 25-50% covered Bank 50-75% covered Bank % covered (c) Shape of the channel: 5. Presence of naturally-occurring organic material (i.e., leaves and twigs, etc.) in stream: Na rrow, d eep Wide, deep Non e Occasional Plentiful Narrow, shallow Wide, shallow 6. Water appearance: Clear Light brown Orange 13. Describe the streamside cover. Check 0 if absent, 1 if present, 2 if common (a) Along water's edge and stream bank only: Mil ky Dark brown / tea Greenish Foamy Oily sheen Tur bid Logs, large woody debris Rootwa ds Other Overhanging vegetation Small woody debris 7. Water odor: Sewage Fishy Non e Chl orine Rotten eggs Other 8. Water temperature: C or F Boulders/rocks Undercut banks Anthropogenic (manmade) structures Deep water, turbulence or foam Lawn Bare soil

10 What We ve Found ( ) 2027 survey locations -NHFGD, NHDES, & USFS Survey Summary ( ) Over 56,000 stream meters surveyed 289 of 514 sites have documented wild brook trout populations Inclusive Surveys ( ) Wild Brook Trout Present N=1018 Wild Brook Trout Absent N=1009

11 Data Use Guidance tool for land protection Research and educational opportunities (website) Data helps identify and prioritize restoration projects Developing partnerships Benefit to all fish species and other aquatic wildlife (i.e. state T&E spp)

12 Land Protection Partnering with SPNHF, TNC, TPL, PREP, and TU Protection of lower order streams/rivers through local mgmt plans (NFD 2009, Lamprey River Coalition and Winnipesaukee Watershed Plan 2010) Support protective designation of rivers and dam removal projects, as well as easement agreements Establish partnerships with town conservation commissions to share town specific survey data

13 Research Projects UNH Research: How runoff temperatures and stream crossings impact fish communities NHDES: In-stream flow and fish community assemblage models Wild brook trout genetics Regional stream classification models Figure 2. Radio tag proposed to be used in this study Northern region predictive model for the EBTJV-FHP Stream crossing restoration prioritization projects

14 Identifying and Prioritizing Restoration Habitat survey includes comments on: impacts found within the stream along the corridor adjacent landuse within the watershed On the ground fish and habitat data will be layered with already existing land use information from mapping software to further prioritize future restoration Local anglers have provided anecdotal information regarding wild brook trout populations Provides the opportunity to enlighten local planners and other groups on the impacts as well as catalog them for future restoration

15 Formalizing Partnerships Experience helps awareness and stewardship prosper in local areas Trout Unlimited and Watershed Association members have been instrumental, especially on larger rivers/streams Volunteers from the general public TNC TPL Dartmouth College Grant Angler groups

16 Fish Species and Other Aquatic Wildlife Benefit Promote healthy and intact aquatic ecosystems free flowing rivers/streams and riparian buffer protection suitable stream crossings reducing sedimentation Intact water quality Awareness to more than just wild brook trout populations rare fish species will be promoted at the town/watershed level State Endangered American Brook Lamprey State Threatened Bridle Shiner

17 Manchester Restoration Project 2010

18 EBTJV-FHP Restoration EPA Section 319 funded a watershed restoration plan-mcquesten Brook Watershed (Manchester/Bedford) McQuesten Brook is within the 95 th percentile for brook trout density in NH Future projects: Improve stream crossings Sediment detention/removal Improve riparian zone Increase outreach on the need to protect small, wild brook trout pops

19 Surveyed catchments within the WNP and Lamprey Watersheds The Lakes Region Planning Commission and Lamprey River Watershed Coalition are currently developing watershed master plans that include protecting wild brook trout populations. This is the type of project we see a lot of value to include with the watershed planning endeavor. - Erica Anderson, Senior Planner, LRPC

20 Swift Diamond Radio Telemetry

21

22

23

24 Lotek Transmitter ATS Transmitter

25 2010 Tag Summary 15 fish tagged 3 females, 10 males, 2 unknown size range TL inches WGT pounds 0 tagging mortality 2 missing 1 angler related mortality Tag returned for reuse 3 in the Magalloway, 5 in the Dead Diamond, 4 in the Swift Diamond

26

27

28

29

30

31

32 20 10 Radio Telemetry Project on Swift Diamond River Tag # Code Date Location TL Wgt Sex Fin Clip Code Sponsor /16/10 Gauge Pool F 001A08 Worster /16/10 Gate Camp Bridge B01 LV Owens /16/10 Gauge Pool F 001B07 Thompson /16/10 Gauge Pool M 001B09 Haskell /16/ /16/10 Gate Camp Bridge Gate Camp Bridge M 001B10 Cupsuptic Navy M 001C08 Piampiano /22/10 Gauge Pool m 001D07 Don Grosset /22/10 Gauge Pool m 001D08 Daniel Nein /22/10 Gauge Pool m 001D09 Dave Bowie /22/10 Gauge Pool m 001D /4/10 Ellingwood Falls M 001F01 Merrimack Val TU #1 Merrimack Va #2 l TU /25/10 Hand on Rock M 001I07 Glenn Booma /25/10 Downstream Ellingwood Pool I08 Lauren DiBiccari /28/10 Ellingwood F alls M 001J /15/10 Elk Horn Camp F 001J05 Rangeley Guides #1 Rangeley Guides #2

33

34 Summary Winter in the Magalloway have moved to deeper water There is one left in the Dead Diamond The ones in the Swift Diamond are all missing

35 ANY QUESTIONS?

36 Questions?