Coquitlam Water Use Plan

Coquitlam Water Use Plan Assessment of Fisheries Access to Streams Tributary To Coquitlam Reservoir COQMON#1 Study Period: September 1, 2006 May 31, 2007 Report Date: January 2008 Scott Ducharme Aquatec Resources January 2008

ASSESSMENT OF FISHERIES ACCESS TO STREAMS TRIBUTARY TO COQUITLAM RESERVOIR Aquatec Resources

ASSESSMENT OF FISHERIES ACCESS TO STREAMS TRIBUTARY TO COQUITLAM RESERVOIR Prepared for: B.C. Hydro Coquitlam-Buntzen Water Use Plan Monitoring Program 6911 Southpoint Drive Burnaby, BC V3N 4X8 Prepared by: Scott Ducharme Aquatec Resources 1680 East Road Anmore, BC V3H 5E9 Phone: 604-690-1474 January 2008

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study represents a component of the monitoring program BC Hydro has been ordered to undertake as partial fulfillment of its commitments made during the Coquitlam-Buntzen Water Use Plan (WUP) process. A preliminary assessment of Coquitlam Reservoir tributary access conducted during the WUP, identified fish access at the mouth of Meech Creek during low reservoir conditions as a potential fisheries impact. After a brief review of fish access for tributaries to Coquitlam Reservoir, a fish inventory and habitat assessment was evaluated throughout the accessible portions of Meech Creek and its tributaries CO-43 and CO-35 and above the operating elevations of Coquitlam Reservoir. The results of the habitat assessment are summarized as follows: 1. Suitable habitat exists above the operating zone for cutthroat (or rainbow) trout in reach s 1 and 3, but is unlikely to be suitable for kokanee given the published accounts of reservoir spawning. CO-43 has zero fish presence and lacked suitable rearing or spawning habitat. CO-35 has suitable rearing and spawning habitat, but as trapping results indicated this tributary is under utilized. 2. As determined through bio-standards for fish access, a vertical barrier (log structure) to fish migration exists in Reach 1 for rainbow and cutthroat trout between mid March and early May given normal historic operating elevations of the Coquitlam Reservoir. Reservoir levels below 149m pose a potential migration barrier; due to lack of plunge pool and jump height to access upstream habitat. 3. The results indicate that the vertical barrier, as it exists, is limiting the availability of upstream spawning and rearing habitat for cutthroat (Oncorhynchus clarki) and or rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in the Coquitlam Reservoir and for this reason, barrier alteration is recommended. Trapping results show that juvenile and adult life stages of cutthroat trout currently inhabit the creek above the log structure which suggests that fish passage may be available or the population has been isolated from the reservoir since the log structure was created. i

This uncertainty has not been addressed in the study and findings have indicated migration can be impeded at the log structure and therefore options for barrier alteration or removal is recommended and provided for consideration to the Water Use Plan Monitoring Committee. ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (1) Tony Matahlija, North Fraser Salmon Assistance Society I would like to personally thank Tony for allowing me to contract his services in assisting me throughout the field work of this study. (2) Dave Hunter and Alf Leake, BC Hydro. (3) Brian De Gusseme and Scott Stuart, Metro Vancouver Watershed Management Division. (4) Sam Gidora, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Habitat Biologist. (5) Peter Troffe ~ InStream Fisheries Research (6) John Sellers ~ Technical assistance iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 1 2.0 METHODS 4 3.0 RESULTS AND FINDINGS 4 3.1 Meech Creek Environmental Data 4 3.2 Fish habitat and fish use assessment 7 3.2.1 Meech Creek - Reach 1 Lower Meech 7 3.2.2 Meech Creek - Reach 2 12 3.2.3 Meech Creek - Reach 3 14 3.2.4 Meech Creek - Reach 4 15 3.2.5 Meech Creek - Reach 5 ~ Upper Meech 17 3.2.6 Tributary C0-43 18 3.2.7 Tributary C0-35 20 3.3 Potential for Fish Passage 22 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 25 4.1 Barrier Mitigation Prescriptions 26 5.0 REFERENCES CITED 30 APPENDIX I 32 APPENDIX II 39 iv

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Meech Creek and associated tributaries draining into the south western side of Coquitlam Reservoir. Figure 2 Meech Creek and tributary stream reaches surveyed. Figure 3 - Meech Creek average monthly flows and total daily precipitation during 2006-2007 assessment periods. Figure 4 - Meech Creek average monthly flows including CO-35, 2004-2007. Figure 5 - Meech Creek mouth, reservoir elevation at 144m, May-07. Figure 6 - Meech Creek mouth, May 15, 2007 Figure 7 - Log structure, 12m upstream of Meech Creek mouth, Oct-06, Reservoir level at 145m. Figure 8- Log structure, 12m upstream of Meech Creek mouth, Mar-07, reservoir elevation at 149 m. Figure 9 - Log structure, 12m upstream of Meech Creek mouth, reservoir elevation at 144m, May-07. Figure 10 - Upstream view of Meech Creek, Reach 2, Oct-06. Figure 11 - Upstream view of Meech Creek, Reach 2, May-07. Figure 12 Reach 3 - spawning & rearing habitat area, May-07. Figure 13 - Recent tree blow down in Reach 3, upper Meech, May-07. Figure 14 - Reach 4 390m, upper Meech Creek, Aug-06. Figure 15 Meech Creek, Reach 4 -Tree uprooted in creek, May-07. Figure 16 Meech Creek, Reach 5 looking upstream from road, culvert at West Mainline Br. Oct-06. Figure 17 - Mouth of Meech Creek tributary, CO-43, Oct-06. Figure 18-22m upstream CO-43 ~ gradient 21 %, Oct-06. Figure 19 - CO-35, downstream of culvert at Spur 400 road. May-07. v

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 20 - CO-35, 35m upstream of road culvert, Oct-06. Figure 21 - Predicted Coquitlam Reservoir Elevations once maximum operating level restored in 2009. vi

LIST OF TABLES Table 1 - Summary of Meech Creek mainstem, tributary CO-35 -CO 43 habitat assessment and fish inventory. Table 2 - Reach 1, log structure, seasonal jump height and plunge pool depth vs. Coquitlam reservoir elevation. Table 3 - Meech Creek - Reach 1 Lower Meech Log jam predicted seasonal pool depths required to allow adult upstream passage. Table 4 - Budget - Estimated costs of barrier alteration and monitoring. vii

LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX I FIELD NOTES Fish Distribution Data Quantitative habitat Assessment Data APPENDIX II ADDITIONAL PHOTOS Meech Creek May 31, 2007 Cutthroat trout Cutthroat juveniles - Reach 3 Cutthroat trout identified Cutthroat adult Parr and yearling juvenile viii

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background The Coquitlam-Buntzen Water Use Plan identified possible fisheries impacts to Coquitlam Reservoir tributaries affected by variation in reservoir elevation height during Coquitlam Dam operations. A preliminary study was undertaken to evaluate fish access to all tributaries to the Coquitlam Reservoir and concluded all but three creeks retained fisheries access through out the historic range of reservoir elevations (Bussanich, et al. 2006). The present study will assess the three streams, Meech Creek and its two unnamed tributaries CO-43 and CO-35, for fish use, access and habitat potential (Figures 1, and 2). Watershed Code: 100-024500-00000-00000-000 Geo-data BC Trim Map reference: 092G.037 and 092G.036 Latitude: 49 21.478N Longitude: 122 47.542W Meech Creek watershed size, 34 hectares, (84 acres), (BC MOE, 2007). Meech Creek mean annual discharge (excluding CO-35) is 0.0438cms. The Meech Creek drainage area has historically been a significant source of sediment to the reservoir with major slide events (Amos and Stuart 2005). In 1981 the first major slide occurred and in 1992 a stabilization plan was undertaken to remove debris accumulation and line the main channel with geo-textile and rip rap. The second major landslide occurred in 1998 and caused a 5000 6000 cubic meter slide impacting the creek, scouring the channel and removing much of the rip rap lining that had been installed in previous years. The failure was sourced again to the upper reaches of Meech Creek. In 2004 the creek was again lined and armoured with large angular rip rap, control sections were installed and secured by concrete and steel pins, and as of to date no other major slides have occurred (De Gusseme et al. 2007). Some of the debris from the second slide ended up in the lower reaches of Meech Creek which has resulted in potential obstacles for fish passage to and from the reservoir. 1

The purpose of this study is to assess fish access to streams tributary to Coquitlam Reservoir, specifically Meech Creek and its two unidentified tributaries CO-43 and CO-35. Primarily, this study seeks to provide information and recommendations in order for management to answer these questions: (1) What are the impacts of Coquitlam Dam operations on fish access to Coquitlam Reservoir tributaries and how can they be addressed? (2) Are the streams fish bearing, and do they provide habitat value or potential? This study will identify fish use and/or fish habitat potential in each of the three streams and provide recommendations for restoring access through physical works or Dam operational controls Figure 1 Meech Creek and associated tributaries draining into the south western end of Coquitlam Reservoir (Ortho-photo, Navteq 2007). 2

Figure 2 Meech Creek and tributary stream reaches (BC MOE 2007). 3

2.0 METHODS Habitat and inventory assessments were conducted in accordance with Resource Inventory Standards Committee and Watershed Restoration Program guidelines. Inventory and monitoring occurred in late summer (August 2006), fall (October 2006) and spring (May 2007).Visual observations for spawning trout and cutthroat was also conducted in October 2006 and March 2007. At each sampling site, habitat characteristics were documented, quantified and photographed. The habitat data collected focused on bank-full width, wetted width, wetted depth, channel gradient, potential barriers, pool depth, jump height, substrate, canopy coverage, and basic water quality observations were monitored such as temperature, clarity and velocity. The following species are the main focus of this study; rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) spawning, rearing, incubation and over-wintering year round; cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki) spawning, rearing, incubation and over-wintering year round; and kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka) spawning and incubation in the fall and spring only. Fish sampling was conducted using 1 / 8 and 1 / 4 mesh size gee traps, baited with salmon roe. All fish species collected are identified, enumerated and measured for fork length and weight. For more details on field observations see summarized data in Appendix I 3.0 RESULTS AND FINDINGS 3.1 Meech Creek Environmental Data The information presented in Figure 3 illustrates the monthly average flow rate and precipitation data provided by Meech Creek monitoring station for the period August 2006 to May 2007 (De Gusseme 2007).Tributary CO-35 is not monitored for flow discharge but contributes significant flow during the year, therefore CO-35 flow contribution was estimated and calculated into the discharge data. Historical Meech Creek discharge rate from 2004 to 2007 including CO-35 illustrates how precipitation events during the fall and winter correlate with high flow periods. 4

Discharge was estimated by calculating the area and discharge of a known portion of the watershed and correlating the data to the drainage area of CO-35, this calculation provides a more accurate discharge rate in reach 1 and therefore future flow predictions should include the tributary contribution. 2006 Meech Creek Monthly Average Discharge including CO-35 and Precipitation Data flow (cms) 0.1800 0.1600 0.1400 0.1200 0.1000 0.0800 0.0600 0.0400 0.0200-900.0 800.0 700.0 600.0 500.0 400.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 - precipitation (mm) Aug-06 Sep-06 Oct-06 Nov-06 Dec-06 Jan-07 Feb-07 Mar-07 Apr-07 May-07 MONTH precipitation (mm) flow rate (m3/sec) Figure 3 - Meech Creek average monthly flows and total daily precipitation during 2006-2007 assessment periods. 5

Meech Creek 5 year Average Monthly Discharge 0.2000 0.1800 0.1600 0.1400 CMS 0.1200 0.1000 0.0800 Data 2004 2005 2006 2007 0.0600 0.0400 0.0200 0.0000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2004 0.0841 0.0208 0.0785 0.0041 0.0119 0.0028 0.0003 0.0070 0.0057 0.0334 0.0952 0.1152 2005 0.1837 0.0247 0.0405 0.0367 0.0123 0.0041 0.0113 0.0003 0.0156 0.0752 0.0729 0.0591 2006 0.1242 0.0348 0.0310 0.0389 0.0136 0.0157 0.0002 0.0000 0.0032 0.0248 0.1567 0.0746 2007 0.0950 0.0722 0.0956 0.0827 0.0088 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Month Figure 4 - Meech Creek average monthly flows including CO-35, 2004 to 2007. Figure 4 illustrates the 2004 to 2007 average monthly discharge rate of Meech creek including estimated tributary CO-35 contribution. The varying discharge patterns indicate that Meech creek is significantly affected by precipitation induced flow events which, given the small size of Meech Creek Watershed, 34 hectares and an elevation of 670m indicates minimal influence from snow melt driven run off during spring and summer months. 6

3.2 Fish habitat and fish Use Assessment 3.2.1 Meech Creek - Reach 1 Lower Meech Reach 1 begins at the confluence of Meech Creek at the Coquitlam Reservoir and extends 68m upstream to the bridge crossing at Coquitlam Br. 400 spur road and Meech Creek (Figure 5). FISH HABITAT The available habitat in Reach 1 consists primarily of boulder-step pool and cascade step pool configuration which limited sampling methods. The mean bank-full width is 7.2m and the mean wetted width is 3.5m. This reach is characterized with small pools from the mouth to 40m upstream where boulder and large rock dominate the substrate. The mean gradient of reach 1 is 18% and increases to 21% 100m upstream above Meech Creek bridge crossing (Table 1). The substrate has been heavily impacted by upper debris torrents and a gravel bar is forming at Meech Creek mouth fanning into Coquitlam Lake (Figure 5). The lower reach substrate is dominated with boulder and large rock and sub-dominated with cobble, fines and organics, most of the available pockets of gravel have been scoured from pools. In-stream and riparian vegetation is sparse, moss was observed on many of the instream boulders and woody debris. 45m upstream in this reach, the riparian area consisted of a young mixed forest of conifers and deciduous trees that are under water at reservoir levels above 148m. Lower flood plain area is void of riparian canopy and in the channel young alders are submerged at a lake elevation of 149m. 7

Figure 5 - Meech Creek mouth, reservoir elevation at 144m, May-07. Figure 6 - Meech Creek mouth, May 15, 2007 8

Table 1 - Summary of Meech Creek and tributaries CO-35, Co 43 habitat assessment and fish inventory. FISH ASSESSMENT MEECH CREEK FISH HABITAT August 2006 October 2006 May 2007 Reach 1 100m Boulder step pools. Areas of suitable spawning, rearing habitat. 54-128mm Cutthroat Trout No trapping 67 140mm, Cutthroat Trout Reach 2 207m large boulder rock and cobble. Cascade pools. Grade >17 %. Not suitable rearing spawning habitat. No Fish Presence No Fish Presence No Fish Presence Reach 3 113m Cobble & gravel, riffles, pool areas. suitable spawning and rearing habitat, 61-110mm Cutthroat Trout 67 104mm Cutthroat Trout 65-150mm Cutthroat Trout Reach 4 190m Cobble gravel and fines. Pocket areas of pools, minimal spawning, and rearing habitat available. No Trapping, due to low flows. 0 Captured 0 Captured Reach 5 40m Bolder step pool area minimal during low flows. Not suitable rearing spawning habitat. Observed Cutthroat Trout in pool above Coq West mainline rd. No Trapping, due to low flows. 0 observed. No Trapping, due to low flows. 0 observed. CO-35 35m Cobble, gravel and fines. Pool, riffle areas. Areas of suitable rearing, spawning habitat. 0 Captured 0 Captured 0 Captured CO-43 110m Confined channel, large rock and cobble. Not suitable habitat. No Trapping, due to low flows. 0 observed. 0 Captured No Fish Presence No Trapping, due to low flows. 0 observed. 9

A large log structure 22 m upstream of the confluence is lodged across and within the channel, (Table 2, Figure 6-9). A gravel wedge has become trapped and stored above the log jam and lower reaches have become scoured of gravel. The height of the barrier (jump height) and pool depth below log structure varied with reservoir elevation and precipitation events and are outlined in Table 2. Table 2 - Reach 1, log structure, seasonal jump height and plunge pool depth vs. Coquitlam Reservoir elevation. Season Reservoir Elevation (m) Jump Height (m) Avg. Pool Depth (m) Late Summer (August 30 31, 2006) Fall (October 30-31, 2006 Spring (March 13, 2007) Early Summer (May 14-15, 2007) 145 1.45 0.27 145 1.45 0.32 149 0.75 0.68 144 1.45 0.27 Figure 7 - Log structure, 12m upstream of Meech Creek mouth, Oct-06, Reservoir level at 145m. 10

Figure 8 - Log structure, 12m upstream of Meech Creek mouth, Mar-07, reservoir elevation at 149 m. Figure 9 - Log structure, 12m upstream of Meech Creek mouth, reservoir elevation at 144m, May-07. 11

FISH ASSESSMENT Reach 1 Gee trapping data indicated that all life stages of cutthroat trout are present and inhabit the lower areas of reach 1. A total of 7 cutthroat trout were captured in six pool areas using ten gee traps. Less than 25% of captured cutthroat are considered mature and spawning or paring up was not observed at anytime during field surveys (see Appendix I for biological data) Other species found were western brook lamprey (Lampetra Richardsoni) and prickly sculpin (Cottus Asper) which are typically found in sandy, rocky shores of lakes and streams. Both species were captured downstream of log structure. Trapping results demonstrated that juvenile and adult cutthroat trout were found below and upstream of the log structure barrier. Reservoir operations below 150m may have an impact on the ability of cutthroat to migrate to upstream habitat if pool depth is inadequate to successfully jump log structure (Table 2). Fish sampled below the log structure are able to access the lake for food and refuge during high or low flows however overall weight and length did not vary from cutthroat trout captured above log structure. 3.2.2 Meech Creek - Reach 2 Reach 2 continues from the bridge crossing at Coquitlam Br. 400 spur road and Meech Creek to approximately 207m upstream. (Figure 3) FISH HABITAT Measuring 20m upstream of the bridge the gradient and substrate composition change to dominate large boulder and rock which continues 207m upstream. The lower portion of the reach consists of boulder, step pool and cascade step pool habitat (Figures 10 and 11). 100m upstream from the bridge several mature trees have been blown down uprooted and fallen across and within the creek channel. During the fall of 2006 wind and heavy precipitation had severe impacts with significant large woody debris accumulation trapping cobble, gravel and organic material causing stream flow to branch and braid into smaller flows across the width of the log structure. The mean channel width is 7.5m and gradient increases from 17% to 26% over the first 35m. The riparian vegetation consists primarily of mature coniferous vegetation with a secondary mix of deciduous mix at the lower reaches of the stream. Little in stream vegetation was observed with the exception of moss forming on the top of woody debris and boulders. 12

FISH ASSESSMENT Trapping data in late summer and spring indicated fish presence in the lowest pool located 5m from the start point of reach 2. Trapping effort utilized 5 traps over 20m and captured 1 cutthroat during the spring survey. The steep gradient and lack of available rearing and spawning habitat indicates poor conditions for fish residence (Table 1). Figure 10 -Upstream view of Meech Creek, Reach 2, Oct06 Figure 11 - Upstream view of Meech Creek, Reach 2, May-07 13

3.2.3 Meech Creek - Reach 3 Reach 3 starts approximately 207m upstream of the bridge crossing with decreasing gradient of <2 % and extends upstream to CO-35 confluence approximately 281m upstream of Meech bridge crossing (Figure 2). FISH HABITAT The assessed length of Reach 3 is 113m, the average channel width is 4.5m and the mean wetted area is 3.5m. The channel meanders frequently providing pools, runs, glides, riffles, and refuge areas were large and small woody debris have accumulated. The substrate throughout this reach is dominated by cobble and gravel and sub-dominant sands and organic material (Figure 12). Several boulders are scattered throughout this reach and several small areas of exposed and undercut banks were observed. May 2007 field study observed several large mature trees that have fallen, in a 10m area, into the channel increasing cover, refuge and pool habitat but also affecting water flow (Figure 13). The riparian vegetation is predominately an old growth coniferous canopy with a mix of conifers and deciduous vegetation such as salmon berry, vine maple and fern. Figure 12 Reach 3 - spawning & rearing habitat area, May-07. 14

Figure 13 - Recent tree blow down in Reach 3, upper Meech, May - 07. FISH ASSESSMENT Trapping throughout this reach resulted in considerable numbers of cutthroat trout. Utilizing five gee traps covering 140m of habitat, 14 cutthroat trout were captured and identified at juvenile and adult life stages. The average fork-length is 61mm to 110mm and a weight range of 2g to 22g (Table 1). Reach 3 is recognized as the most productive fish habitat area of Meech Creek, providing areas of suitable incubation, rearing and spawning habitat for all life stages of cutthroat trout (Figure 12). 3.2.4 Meech Creek - Reach 4 Reach 4 starts at CO-35 confluence and continues upstream 190m to the culvert at west mainline road (Figure 2). FISH HABITAT The mean gradient within the assessed length of Reach 4 is 14%; the average bank-full width is 2.2m and the mean wetted width 1.9m. The first 20m of reach 4 is confined and below a 2% grade, this section is significantly overgrown with vegetation and several areas have 15

accumulated large and small woody debris jams. The channel substrate is dominated by cobble, although there are pockets of gravel and fines in pool areas at the mid and upper reach. Approximately 98m upstream from the reach break the substrate becomes dominated by boulder and large rock. The bank vegetation contains a mix of young and mature coniferous and deciduous trees. Young vegetation such as salmon berry, sword fern and vine maple provide significant in-stream cover. Located at the upper reach, stream flow has actively eroded sections of the bank providing areas of refuge and cover; at present the banks are stable. Observations of water quality were good throughout survey dates although there is a significant presence of iron oxide on the substrate throughout this reach (Figure 14). Figure 14 - Reach 4 390m, upper Meech Creek, Aug-06. FISH ASSESSMENT Gee trapping was unsuccessful throughout this reach due to channel substrate, low flow, inadequate depth and lack of rearing or pool habitat. Trapping effort utilized 2 traps over 75m and captured zero species. Reach CO-35 has also been significantly impacted from trees that have been blown down and up-rooted during last fall (2006) storm events (Figure 14) which caused braiding an splitting of stream flow at several areas. The stream gradient in the upper reach of this section is 14-21% which may also impede fish movement (Table 1). 16

Figure 15 Meech Creek, Reach 4 Large cedar uprooted in creek, May 07 3.2.5 Meech Creek - Reach 5 ~ Upper Meech Reach 5 begins on the upstream side of Coquitlam West Mainline Road and was assessed to approximately 35m upstream from the road (Figure 2). FISH HABITAT Reach 5 is identified as boulder step pool habitat, the average bank-full width is 4m, wetted width is 0.9m, and mean gradient 18% (Table 1). During low flows movement may be impeded due to a significant boulder jump and shallow plunge pool that occurs 20m upstream of the starting point. Although pockets of pool habitat are available and provide temporary rearing habitat (Figure 16), the upstream 270m is dominated by large boulders and rock that were placed in the creek channel in 2004 as part of mitigation to prevent erosion and sediment slides from entering the reservoir. Upstream of this section the present configuration is a straight chute channel formation that does not provide rearing or spawning habitat. The banks are vegetated with a mix of deciduous and mature coniferous trees; any in stream vegetation has been impacted by previous slides and is minimal. Stream canopy cover decreases as gradient increases upstream to the headwaters. 17

FISH ASSESSMENT Trapping survey resulted in zero species captured although cutthroat trout were visually observed in a deep pool above road culvert during the August site survey (Table 2). Trapping effort utilized 6 gee traps covering a distance of 45m. Figure 16 Meech Creek, Reach 5 looking upstream from road, culvert at West Mainline Br. Oct-06. 3.2.6 Tributary C0-43 Tributary C0-43 is second order tributary and enters Meech Creek from the right bank side above log jam barrier, 26m upstream from the reservoir confluence (Figure 2). FISH HABITAT Trapping assessment was limited to October survey session due to precipitation providing sufficient flow and small pool areas. A 25m length was assessed before gradient increased to 21%, the mean bank-full width through this section was 1.7m and the wetted width was 0.8m (Table 1). Fish passage is impeded at the mouth with a small woody debris barrier that creates a vertical jump and lacks a plunge pool (Figure 17). Approximately 35m upstream substrate is dominated by large rock and boulders along the channel and stream banks (Figure 18). Riparian vegetation is dense and provides in-stream canopy. The flow in CO-43 is observed to be seasonal and provides no suitable rearing or off channel habitat. 18

Figure 17 - Mouth of Meech Creek tributary, CO-43, Oct-06. Figure 18-22m upstream CO-43 ~ gradient 21 %, Oct-06 19

FISH ASSESSMENT Gee trapping in the fall survey was unsuccessful throughout this reach due to channel substrate, low flow, inadequate water depth, lack of pool habitat and high gradient. Four gee traps were utilized in available pools and zero fish were captured. Tributary CO-43 does not provide suitable rearing or spawning habitat but the lower portion could be accessed for refuge during high water events in main-stem Meech Creek. 3.2.7 Tributary C0-35 Tributary Co-35 is a second order tributary of Meech Creek and its confluence occurs 376m upstream from the mouth of Meech Creek (Figure 2). The tributary continues upstream across Coquitlam West branch road and was assessed to 45 meter upstream of the road culvert. CO- 35 contributes a daily average of.026cms of flow to mainstem Meech and flows throughout the year. FISH HABITAT With an assessed length of 110m and an average gradient of <1%, CO-35 is a relatively short, low gradient reach. The mean channel width is 2.7m and the wetted width is 2.4m. The creek flow braids around in-stream woody debris at areas depending on seasonal flows (Table 1). Cobble is the most dominate substrate with gravel and fines sub-dominate in the lower section of the reach (Figure 19). Spring survey observed numbers of mature trees blown down within the channel and impeding directional flow through stream channel. CO-35 provides pockets with suitable spawning but lacks suitable year round rearing habitat. The upper reach of C0-35 above Coq West Br. 400 road, was assessed and trapped for a length of 45m (Figure 20). The lower 30m offers suitable substrate and pool areas for rearing; upstream the channel becomes more confined and the substrate is dominated with fines and organics offering minimal spawning and rearing habitat. Continuing 55m upstream the creek channel fans out into a wetland catchment area, the channel continues upstream until Coq west mainline road drainage. In-stream vegetation is dense with salmon berry and vine maple; young deciduous and coniferous vegetation overhang the stream channel throughout the length assessed. 20

Figure 19 - CO-35, downstream of culvert at Spur 400 road. May-07. Figure 20 - CO-35, 35m upstream of road culvert, Oct-06. FISH ASSESSMENT No fish were trapped in the fall and spring surveys above and below the culvert at spur 400 road crossing (Table 1). However, one cutthroat trout was observed in a pool above Coquitlam west branch 400 road in late August reconnaissance. Trapping effort utilized 12 gee traps covering a distance of 45m. Tributary CO-35 does provide suitable rearing, spawning habitat 21

but presently a small woody debris structure and vertical barrier (0.7m) upstream of Meech Creek confluence has the potential of impeding passage to the upstream habitat. 3.3 Potential for Fish Passage Factors including flow, jump height, and plunge pool depth were considered in assessing fish passage potential at the log structure in Reach 1. The bio-standard commonly used to assess fish passage potential is that the pool depth below the obstacle must be 1.25 times the jump height (Slaney 1996). The plunge pool depths observed during the monitoring period appear to restrict passage given the criteria that the pool depth must be 1.25 times the height (Table 3). Table 3 - Meech Creek - Reach 1 Lower Meech log jam predicted seasonal pool depths required to allow adult upstream passage. * Pool depth must be at least 1.25 times the height of the jump) Season Fall (October 30-31, 2006 Spring (March 13, 2007) Early Summer (May 14-15, 2007) Reservoir Jump Average Pool Predicted Pool Elevation Height Depth (m) Depth Required (m) (m) to Jump Barrier (m) * 145 1.45 0.27 1.81 149 0.75 0.68 0.94 144 1.45 0.27 1.81 Based on projected completion of the Coquitlam Dam seismic upgrade in summer 2008, the maximum operating level of Coquitlam Reservoir will be returned to the normal maximum operating level of 154 m from the current maximum interim level of 149 m (Hunter, 2006). Figure 21 outlines the proposed seasonal reservoir fluctuation once the normal maximum reservoir level is reinstated. Fall drawdown gradually increasing through winter months and spring to a summer high and peak holding capacity. 22

Coquitlam Reservoir Elevation 156 154 152 150 Elevation (m) 148 146 144 142 140 138 Jan-01 Jan-31 Mar-03 Apr-02 May-03 Jun-02 Jul-03 Aug-02 Sep-02 Oct-02 Nov-02 Dec-02 Date 10%ile 50%ile 90%ile Figure 21 - Predicted Coquitlam Reservoir Elevations once maximum operating level restored in 2009 (Hunter 2006). Typically, resident cutthroat trout begin to spawn in mid May to early June with predicted reservoir levels varying from 149m to 151m (Table 3). Rainbow Trout begin spawning in mid March to late May (Gidora 2007) when reservoir elevations are typically 148m to 149m. Based on the predicted pool depth required to pass the log structure and estimated seasonal flow, rainbow and cutthroat trout access appears feasible when reservoir levels are 149.5m or greater. According to the passage criteria in Table 2, 149.5m would represent a 25cm jump and available pool depth of 1.18m suggesting passage would not be impeded. Therefore there is the potential for passage if the reservoir elevation is 149.5m or greater for extended periods of time during migration period. Kokanee peak spawning time in the Coquitlam Reservoir occurs mid October to mid November (Bussanich et al. 2006) when predicted reservoir levels vary from 144m to 145m. Jump height and lower reservoir levels in the fall appear to be the constraining factor, 23

however, it is unlikely that kokanee would access Meech Creek to spawn. According to a previous study (Bussanich et al. 2006) it was observed that kokanee in the Coquitlam Reservoir primarily utilize shoreline areas with gravel and up welling water influence. Tributaries in the Coquitlam reservoir are under utilized due to lack of quality spawning habitat, however, access to Meech Creek may be possible with higher reservoir levels. Considering the average fish size of sampled cutthroat trout is <200mm for adult and yearlings, lake access and migration can be impeded and affected by reservoir operations and the vertical log structure barrier in reach 1. It is a possibility that rainbow trout were not found due to seasonal low flows, a reservoir elevation below 149m and the log structure barrier during spring spawning migration. Other factors created by instream barriers is the inability of adult and juvenile fish to adjust to changing habitat conditions such as temperature fluctuations, high or low flows, available food and limited shelter. Catastrophic events can displace entire resident populations, and barriers have the potential to prevent re-colonization of these habitats (ODFW 2000). Pool depth must be at least 1.25 times the height of the jump for allowable fish migration (Slaney 1996). As illustrated by figure 8, in May 2007 the pool depth required a minimum depth of 1.75m to make the 1.4 meter jump successfully (table 3). Meech Creek discharge, although important, does not have a significant affect on plunge pool depth when the reservoir level is below 149m. Lower flows become braided at the log structure thus reducing the available flow over the center of the barrier and into the plunge pool. Cutthroat trout maximum jump heights are indicated below for example, in order for an adult cutthroat to successfully jump the present 1.5m jump, passage criteria indicates the pool depth would have to be at a minimum of 1.8m in depth. Cutthroat Maximum Jump Capability (Dane 1978) Life Stage Max Jump Height (m) Adult (>200mm) 1.5 Juvenile (125mm) 0.6 Fry (50 mm) 0.4 24

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on habitat assessment and trapping results, cutthroat trout of all life stages were captured in Reach s 1 and 3 of Meech Creek. Although two of the three target species were not captured lake migration is restricted to the lower 30m of Reach 1 due to the log structure impeding migration 24m upstream of the mouth. Reservoir levels below 149m pose a potential migration barrier; due to lack of plunge pool and jump height at log structure to access upstream habitat. Even though this particular creek and habitat is productive for resident cutthroat trout it is recommended that Option 2 (see section 5.1) be considered due to immediate increased habitat benefits, low cost to complete and a minimal impact to riparian area. A sustainable increase in resident fish populations will enrich the food web of the local ecosystem providing a productive habitat (BC Hydro 2003). The barrier alteration may be a medium priority restoration initiative but the overall productivity and complexity will increase in lower reach of Meech Creek and future migration will not be compromised by reservoir fluctuations. Alteration of the barrier, means future reservoir fluctuations and operations will have minimal impact on the migration of resident species and may encourage the introduction and usage by other species. Although present reservoir levels are under the projected holding capacity it may be advisable to continue monitoring migration when reservoir operations return to normal levels in 2009 to confirm fish access or presence. The following steps are recommended: 1. Low impact barrier alteration to be completed. In-stream woody debris utilized for increasing habitat complexity at the site. 2. Ongoing monitoring and evaluation of habitat work completed and maintenance work performed as required. Benefits: 1. Provide year round access to upstream habitat of Reach 1. 2. Create additional 80m to100m available spawning and rearing habitat. 3. Allow natural progression of gravel to be distributed to lower reach and mouth providing the potential of increased spawning habitat. 25

4. Increased available habitat may be beneficial to kokanee colonization and or other species, such as rainbow trout. 5. Lake access for cutthroat trout may serve as an alternative food source or refuge during high flows. 6. Reduce dam footprint impact within reservoir draw down zone. 4.1 Barrier Mitigation Prescriptions The habitat characteristics of lower Meech Creek (Reach 1) evaluated during field assessments concluded that during low flows and a reservoir elevation below 149m the log structure barrier surveyed 22m upstream of the mouth impedes fish passage and migration, (coordinates ~ 49 21.478 N, 122 47.559 W). The log structure is 9.8m wide across the channel and encompasses a 10m area with an average jump height of 1.5m observed during monitoring. A significant amount of gravel is trapped, wedged and stored above the log jam causing the lower reaches to become scoured of gravel, depriving available spawning habitat. Lake elevations below 146m and late summer flows also indicated a secondary smaller woody debris jam 1.7m below the main log structure that can also restrict fish movement and may require minor maintenance. The objective is to restore fish access to available upstream spawning habitat above the log structure. Barrier alteration will also keep the present natural configuration of step pool habitat and woody placement will provide complexity and minimize riparian disturbance. It is recommended that option two be considered as it provides a cost effective and efficient habitat improvement prescription (Table 4). Option 1. Minimal modification to log barrier - notch the main log in several places with a chain saw and punch holes using shovels and pry bars in the upstream area of the sediment wedge to allow water flow to scour an access area, permitting accumulated gravel and fines to be transferred downstream. Allowing gravel to transfer downstream unimpeded will increase substrate in pool and riffle areas, increasing spawning habitat availability. A secondary benefit is allowing channel flow to run in a defined line providing consistent flow in the stream bed when lake elevation is below 146m and creek flow is minimal. A disadvantage of not fully removing the log jam is the potential of upstream debris jams dislodging and increasing the 26

deposit of large woody debris and continuing to trap cobble and gravel braiding and splitting stream channel flow. Option 2. Complete barrier alteration - manually cut large woody debris in manageable 3 to 4m sections, anchor and secure log sections at a 45 degree angle on the left and right bank creating in-stream deflectors. Secure LWD to clusters of large boulder allowing the creation of pool areas and allowing flow to distribute in the center of stream channel creating access for migration and the natural transfer of stored gravel and fines to lower reach area. Using the logs as deflectors will increase existing pool habitat and provide rearing and refuge areas in extreme flows. The benefits of altering the barrier is primarily for fish (adult or juvenile) access to available upstream habitat for spawning / rearing, as well improving the complexity of the present habitat. Providing lake access for food, refuge and possible smolt migration will increase the health and viability of the species that inhabit Meech Creek watershed. Secondary benefits include creating alternate habitat sites with the cut sections of large woody debris (LWD) which can provide cover, refuge and also have potential to trap and accumulate small woody debris. Third, if the barrier is completely altered it will prevent upstream LWD becoming trapped at this section and having the potential of becoming a barrier again in the future. Option 3. Operational procedures during migration. During migration and spawning period of cutthroat, kokanee and rainbow trout, reservoir level will remain at a minimum height of 150m for the duration of the migration period. Activities and Time Line: Work must be completed during fisheries window and or during low flows in late summer ~ August. Maintenance work will be completed by trained personnel. 60 days prior ~ obtain in stream work and fish collection permits from Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Provincial Ministry and BC Hydro. Create safety procedure and protocol. Day 1 ~ install upstream fencing to stop potential movement of Cutthroat downstream. Complete installation of silt fencing material and structure 10m downstream to catch fines and sediment from entering reservoir. Set up pump for dewatering to provide a reduced flow through work site. 27

Day 2 ~ Complete fish salvage up and down stream of work site area. Transfer fish to upstream holding pools. Prepare intake and outflow and dewater work site area. Day 3 & 4 ~ Begin maintenance work. Cut log barrier in half 4.2 and 4.5 m sections with chain saw, winch and anchor in-stream logs to left and right bank at 35 degree angle in-stream. Secure to boulder clusters using cable anchor and epoxy. Using shovels and pry bars begin removing small woody debris and gravel deposits. Alteration and placement of boulders may be required to secure logs deflectors. Small woody debris jam can be cut in place and debris removed and utilized; every attempt will be made to preserve in-stream woody and organic debris content. Day 5 ~ Monitor flow pattern and adjust rock, cobble and boulder configuration if required. Removal of silt fencing and upstream fence; transfer cutthroat trout back to originating holding pools however it would be preferred if they are able to migrate on their own to decrease stress. Recommend ongoing monitoring of stream morphology as flows increase. Potential Problems: During the removal of the log structure there is a potential of temporary release of fines and sediment into the reservoir. To mitigate the effect into the reservoir, cloth silt fencing will be installed in a series to capture any fines and sediment released during procedures. A pump will also be used to de-water work area to allow minimal sediment discharge. Health and Safety issues are to be reviewed for the use of gas powered tools (chainsaw and hammer drill). First aid certification required for site supervisor and emergency call out procedures performed. 28

Table 4 - Budget - Estimated costs of barrier alteration and monitoring. The total estimated cost to complete this project is between $4,650.00 and $5,650.00. Tasks Expense Type Rate Number of Step 1 Field preparation, equipment and supplies Step 2 Fence installation, silt fence x 2 to install Step 2 Fish salvage and transfer Begin de-watering work area Step 2 Barrier removal, anchoring of large woody debris Step 3 Monitoring and evaluation, maintenance if required Units Program Cost Technician I 500 1/2 250 Technician I Technician II Technician I Technician II Technician I Technician II Technician I Technician II 500 350 500 350 500 350 500 350 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 500 350 500 350 500 350 500 350 Step 4 Final report (if required) Miscellaneous Expenses Administration - TOTAL (estimate) Technician I 500 2 1,000 Materials Mileage Equip. Rental -.50 - - 500 250 250 500 5,650.00 29

5.0 REFERENCES CITED Amos, B., Stuart, S. 2005. Meech Creek Erosion Control Project, several un-authored reports. Greater Vancouver Regional District Watershed Management Div. BC Hydro. 2003. Coquitlam River and Buntzen Lake Watersheds. Bridge Coastal Fish and Wildlife Restoration Program. Vol 2. www.bchydro.com/bcrp/aboutdocs/ch08_final. BC Ministry of Environment. 2007. Provincial base map website. www.bcmapinfo.ca Bussanich, R., Bocking, R.C. Nelson, R., Wood C. 2006. Feasibility Assessment of Kokanee Re-Anadromization and Planning of Fish Propagation for Re-introduction of Sockeye Salmon in Coquitlam Reservoir. LGL Ltd, Burnaby, BC: 8 p. Dane B.G. 1978, a Review and Resolution of Fish Passage Problems at Culvert Sites in British Columbia. American Fisheries Society workshop, California. De Gusseme, B., et al. 2007. Meech Creek Background History, various published and unpublished articles and reports, Watershed Management Div, Metro Vancouver. De Gusseme, B., 2007. Meech Creek Climate Station Data 2003 2007. Watershed Management Div, Metro Vancouver. Gidora, S. 2007. Personal Communication, via e-mail and verbal correspondence. Fisheries and Oceans, Canada, Resource Restoration Biologist. Hogan, D.L. and B. Ward, Watershed Geomorphology and Fish Habitat, Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 9, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and Ministry of Forests. Hunter, D., 2006-2007. Personal Communication, via e-mail and verbal correspondence. Natural Resource Specialist, Water License Requirements, BC Hydro. 30

Johnston, N.T. and G.D. Moore, 1995, Guidelines for Planning Watershed Restoration Projects, Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 1, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and Ministry of Forests. Johnston, N.T., P.A. Slaney, 1996, Fish Habitat Assessment Procedures, Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 8, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. Koning., Keely. 2004. Fish Passage Criteria, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Fish habitat Criteria, 2004. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, article by several authors, Fish habitat Criteria, 2000 Ortho-photo. Navteq, 2007. Digital Globe, Google Earth program.www.earth.google.com Ptolemy. R. 2004. Juvenile Freshwater Rearing Habitat Limiting Factors. Coastal Cutthroat Trout as sentinels of Lower Mainland watersheds, Ministry of Environment, 2005. RISC, 2001, Steam Inventory Standards and Procedures, Chapter 4. Resource Information Standards Committee. British Columbia Integrated land management website. Slaney, P.A. and A.D. Martin, 1996, Planning Fish Habitat Rehabilitation: Linking to Habitat Protection, Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 9, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and Ministry of Forests. Whyte, I.W., S. Babakaiff, M. Adams and P. Giroux, Restoring Fish Access and Rehabilitation of Spawning Sites, Applying Rehabilitation Techniques, Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 9, Watershed Restoration Program, Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and Ministry of Forests. 31

APPENDIX I FIELD NOTES 32

APPENDIX I FIELD NOTES Fish Distribution Data Form Watershed Name: Coquitlam Reservoir Watershed Code: 100-024500 Weather: Sunny, windy Date: Aug 31, Oct 31, 2006 Temp: Air = 16 to 21 C Survey Crew: Scott D, Tony M Reach Habitat Trap Distance Gradient No. Species Fork Weight Age Comment No. Type No. (m) % Captured Length (mm) (g) Class 1 pool 1 16.7 13 1 CT 96 15 juv start point at Meech mouth 3 sculpin n/a 1 pool 2 25 16 2 CT 116, 124 22, 24 trap site below log obstruction 1 pool 3 36 21 1 CT 68 2 1.45 m jump at log jam 1 pool 4, 5 40 1 CT 54 1.7 Used 1/4 & 1/8 trap mesh 1 pool 6 47 0 1 pool 7, 8 69 2 CT 110, 116 17.5, 17.5 pool dwnstrm side of bridge X 2 pool 9 88 21 0 upstrm of bridge X 2 pool 10 102 16 0 17.4

Oct 31 CO - 43 Reach Habitat Trap Distance Gradient No. Species Fork Weight Age Comment start point at meech No. Type No. (m) % Captured Length (mm) (g) Class 1 pool 1 3 0 1 pool 2 8 10 0 1 pool 3 16 18 0 confluence small pocket of pools, minimal flow substrate change to rock / boulder 1 pool 4 25 >26 0 Oct 31 9.3 Upper CO-35 Reach Habitat Trap Distance Gradient No. Species Fork Weight Age Comment No. Type No. (m) % Captured Length (mm) (g) Class Start point upstrm of CO35 pool 1 15 0 culvert. CO35 pool 2 35 0 80 % canopy cover CO35 pool 3 49 0 min flow, end below wetland area substrate suitable for spawning CT Oct 31 Lower CO-35 Reach Habitat Trap Distance Gradient No. Species Fork Weight Age Comment No. Type No. (m) % Captured Length (mm) (g) Class CO35 pool 1 9 0 Start dwnstrm of culvert effluent CO35 pool 2 30 0 right bank channel / pool CO35 pool 3 39 0 riparian veg thick with salmon berry CO35 pool 4 47 0 and old growth, meandering. site end at Meech confluence Upper mainstem Meech

Reach Habitat Trap Distance Gradient No. Species Fork Weight Age Comment start point - below rd No. Type No. (m) % Captured Length (mm) (g) Class culvert 3 pool 5 75 < 3 5 CT 85, 80, 64, 81, 73 5.5, 5.5, 2.5, 5, 4 spawning / rearing habitat 3 pool 65 89 < 2 3 CT 80, 84, 72, 6, 6.5, 4.5 nice gravel cobble mix, cover, flow 3 pool 7 112 < 2 2 CT 83, 74 5.5, 4.5 water Temp = 5 C 3 pool 8 128 3 4 CT 104, 74, 72, 67 13, 4, 4.5, 3 Dwnstream habitat change to boulder 3 pool 9 140 17 CT 20% grade, impassable at present flow 5.4 Upper mainstem Meech Reach Habitat Trap Distance Gradient No. Species Fork Weight Age Comment start point - below monitor No. Type No. (m) % Captured Length (mm) (g) Class station 4 pool 1 0 pool below jump 4 pool 2 0 small but deep pool 127 m dwnstrm to CO35 confluence mainstem Upper Meech Reach Habitat Trap Distance Gradient No. Species Fork Weight Age Comment start point - above Coq No. Type No. (m) % Captured Length (mm) (g) Class mainline road 5 pool 1 8 0 pool below jump 5 pool 2 15 0 small but deep pool 5 pool 3 35 0 water = 5 C

Watershed Name: Coquitlam Reservoir Watershed Code: 100-024500 Weather: Sunny Date: May 15, 2007 Temp: Air = 12 to 20 C Survey Crew: Scott D, Tony M Reach Habitat Trap Distance Gradient No. Species Fork Weight Age Comment Start point At Meech No. Type No. (m) % Captured Length (mm) (g) Class mouth 1 pool 1, 1b 16 5 2 CT 67, 68 2.5, 2.5 r.bank pool, cobble, rock, gravel 4 Sculpin n/a 1 Lamprey n/a 1 pool 2, 2b 34 17 0 R. bank pol under root wad 1 pool 3, 3b 44 14 2 CT 80, 90 5.5, 7.5 Pool below Log X barrier 1 pool Sculpin n/a 1 pool 4, 4b 59 14 4 CT 128, 108, 84, 68 22, 19, 5.5, 2 above barrrier adjacent to CO-43 1 glide 5 78 18 0 R.bank pool under cedar 2 pool 6, 6b 91 21 1 CT 140 24 Ad pool below Meech Brdg X 2 pool 7 113 21 0 pool above Meech Brdge X 15.7 Upper CO-35 Reach Habitat Trap Distance Gradient No. Species Fork Weight Age Comment Start point upstream No. Type No. (m) % Captured Length (mm) (g) Class of rd culvert CO-35 pool 1 3 <2 0 pool upstream of culvert CO-35 pool 2 9 <2 0 Lots of instream woody debris CO-35 pool 3 20 <2 0 small pool R. bank ~ min flow CO-35 pool 4 42 4 0 wetland catachment

area above site. CO-35 pool 5 9 n/a 0 pool upstrm of Meech confluence 2.5 Upper Meech Reach Habitat Trap Distance Gradient No. Species Fork Weight Age Comment start point below Co- No. Type No. (m) % Captured Length (mm) (g) Class 35 confluence 3 pool 7 4 <2 11 CT 82,94,105,110,61,65, 5.5,13,13.5,2,2 pool below CO-35 confluence 81,78,71,72,72 5,5.5,5,4.5 decent flow, canopy cover, substrate 3 pool 8 20 <2 13 CT 150,108,102,80,122 22,13,14,5.5,18 pool mid strm, under fallen tree 82,112,82,98,88,128 6,12.5,6,14,5.5,22 100,78 12.5, 5.5 3 pool 9 56 3 11 CT 100,90,110,100,95 8,7.5,13,8,6.5 Deep pool on bend, Lwd accumulation good rearing habiat 89,84,90,82,92,83 6,5,5.5,4.5,11,5 complexity

Quantitative Habitat Assessment ~ Sept, Oct 2006, May 2007 Aug ~ lower Meech Reach Habitat Dist. unit Gradiant bankfull wetted Wetted substrate # Type (m) leng (m) % width (m) width (m) depth(cm) Comment 1 pool 16.7 2 13 7 2.8 25.3 Start at mouth of Meech. 1 pool 25 4.5 16 10.5 4.6 27 g,cs below log X barrier. jump = 1.45 m 1 X 26 9.5 g, f LWD jam barrier, 1.5m jump 1 pool 36 2 16 10.4 3.5 18.5 g,c, f pool above log X barrier 1 Trib 37 45+ >16 3.1 0.5 b,c,g CO-43 confluence 1 pool 40 2.5 7.8 2.3 12 g,f,s,c boulder 1 pool 47 12 7.4 2.2 8 br,b, c Water temp 16 C 1 pool 69 2 3.8 2 16 br,b, c below Meech Brdg X 2 pool 88 3 18 6.9 3.1 11.3 br,b upstrm Brg X - 2 pool 102 4 21 8 4.4 gradient and substrate change 13.7 8.3 2.8 16.9 No available rearing or spawning no available spawning or rearing habitat upstream. Oct ~ Trib Reach Habitat Dist. unit Gradiant bankfull wetted Wetted substrate # Type (m) leng (m) % width (m) width (m) depth(cm) Comment CO- 43 pool 3 2 5 2.2 1.3 22 g, f, s small pocket pools CO- 43 glide 8 2 7 2 1.1 12 g, f, s impassable jump above pool CO- 43 pool 16 2 14 1.1 0.75 8 g, f, r wate temp = 5 C CO- 43 pool 25 2 21 1.5 1 18 g, f, r boulder and high grade above 6.7 1.7 0.8 15.0 Oct ~ CO-35 above culvert Reach Habitat Dist. unit Gradiant bankfull wetted Wetted substrate # Type (m) legth (m) % width (m) width (m) depth(cm) Comment 4b pool 10 2 < 2 2.4 2.1 18 g, c, s overgrown~ woody debris

accumulation 4b pool 32 2 < 2 2 2.2 12.8 g, c, s trout spawning habiat 4b pool 50 2 < 2 2.4 2.8 13 g, c, s R. bank undercut CO- 35 below culvert water = 4 C 3b pool 9 2 < 2 4.4 3.5 16.6 g, c, start point dwnstrm of culvert 3b pool 30 2 < 2 2.4 1.7 18.6 g, c, 3b pool 39 2 < 2 2.1 1.9 21 g, c, s 70 % canopy 3b pool 47 2 < 2 3.2 2.4 26 c, g good rearing / spawn substrate 2.7 2.4 18.0 Oct ~ below CO-35 confluence Reach Habitat Dist. unit Gradiant bankfull wetted Wetted substrate # Type (m) (m) % width (m) width (m) depth(cm) Comment 3 pool 75 2 < 2 4.8 3.9 20 g, c start point from Co-35 culvert 3 pool 89 2 < 2 4.5 3.9 14.6 g, c flow ~.05 cfs 3 pool 112 2 < 2 4.08 2.75 41 g, c, s, Deep pool LWD accumulation 3 pool 128 2 < 2 4.2 3.4 28 g, c, s, Deep pool small jump 3 pool 140 2 < 2 4.4 3.6 25 r, b. c Gradient decreases after this site 4.4 3.5 25.7 Oct ~ upper Meech Reach Habitat Dist. unit Gradiant bankfull wetted Wetted substrate # Type (m) legth (m) % width (m) width (m) depth(cm) Comment 4 pool 15 1 2.1 1.5 26 c, g, b start below monitoring station 4 pool 48 2 2.25 1.9 13 c, g, b series of pools and jumps 5 pool 8 12 2.2 9.6 r, b, g located above Coq west main rd 5 pool 15 2 17 1.9 16 r, b, g Large angular rock, boulder 5 pool 35 26 2.2 14 r, b, g armouring has been completed 18.3 2.2 1.9 15.7 May ~ lower Meech

Reach Habitat Dist. unit Gradiant bankfull wetted Wetted substrate # Type (m) leng (m) % width (m) width (m) depth(cm) Comment 1 pool 16 3 5 3.1 2.7 15 g, c, b Start at mouth of Meech. 1 pool 34 3 17 7.4 4.1 22 b,c,g below log X barrier. jump = 1.45 m 1 X 9.5 b,c,g LWD barrier / no fish passage 1 pool 44 3 14 10.2 6.5 27 c,g,f 1 Trib 45 10 b,c,g CO-43 confluence 1 pool 59 3 17 7.2 2.03 22 b, r,c 1 pool 78 2 18 10 7.2 23 b, r,c pool below Meech brdg X 1 pool 91 21 4.2 2.6 22 b, r,c 1.7m jump above pool 2 X 102 17-21 b,r,c gradient and sustrate change 1.7 m LWD barrier 14.6 8.6 4.2 21.8 May ~ Upper Co 35 Reach Habitat Dist. unit Gradiant bankfull wetted Wetted substrate # Type (m) leng (m) % width (m) width (m) depth(cm) Comment 4b pool 3 2 < 2 3.47 3.1 18 g,c, f staring above rd culvert 4b pool 9 2 < 2 2.9 2.7 14 s, g, c 4b pool 20 2 < 2 2.7 2.8 15 s, g, c R. bank undercut / erosion 4b pool 47 2 < 2 0.9 0.75 26 s, g wetland catch area above 3b pool 15 2 3.1 2 s, g, c Staring pt. below culvert upper Meech pool adjacent to Meech confluence 3 pool 75 4 4 2 23 c,g,f Staring pt. below rd. culvert 112 2 4 1.5 23 c,g,f many trees have blown into creek 128 2 3.6 2.4 34 s, g, c Lwd debris ~ rearing, spawn substrate 3.1 2.2 21.9

APPENDIX II PHOTOS Meech Creek May 31, 2007 - reservoir level 144m, flow.008cms. Meech Creek - Cutthroat Trout 110mm 39

Cutthroat Trout Juveniles. Cutthroat Trout (slash under mouth) 40

Cutthroat Trout yearling2+, juvenile Lower reach, Meech Creek, May 15, 2007 41