Data Download and Methods

Data Download

Coming soon

Connectivity Status Assessment Methods

The connectivity status assessment for anadromous salmonids in the Horsefly River watershed builds on existing connectivity modelling work undertaken by the B.C. Fish Passage Technical Working Group, resulting in a flexible, customizable open-source spatial model called “bcfishpass”. The model spatially locates known and modelled barriers to fish passage, identifies potential spawning and rearing habitat for focal species, and estimates the amount of habitat that is currently accessible to focal species. The model uses an adapted version of the Intrinsic Potential (IP) fish habitat modelling framework (see Sheer et al. (2009) for an overview of the IP framework). The habitat model uses two geomorphic characteristics of the stream network — channel gradient and mean annual discharge — to identify potential spawning habitat and rearing habitat for each focal species. The habitat model does not attempt to definitively map each habitat type nor estimate habitat quality, but rather identifies stream segments that have high potential to support spawning or rearing habitat for each species based on the geomorphic characteristics of the segment. For more details on the connectivity and habitat model structure and parameters, please see (Mazany-Wright et al. (2021a)). The variables and thresholds used to model potential spawning and rearing habitat for each focal species are summarized in Table 15. The quantity of modelled habitat for each species was aggregated for each habitat type and represents a linear measure of potential habitat. To recognize the rearing value provided by features represented by polygons for certain species (e.g., wetlands for Coho Salmon and lakes for Sockeye Salmon) a multiplier of 1.5x the length of the stream segments flowing through the polygons was applied.

Table 1:

Parameters and thresholds used to inform the Intrinsic Potential habitat model for spawning and rearing habitat for each focal species in the Horsefly River watershed.

Species	Channel Gradient (%)(Naturally Accessible Waterbodies)	Channel Gradient (%)	Mean annual discharge (m3/s)	Channel gradient (%)	Mean Annual discharge (m3/s)	Minimum Lake area (ha)	Multiplier (1.5x)
Chinook Salmon	0-15	0-3 [1] [2]	0.46-322.5 [3][4][5][6][7]	0-5 [5][8]	0.28-100 [9]
Coho Salmon	0-15	0-5 [6][10]	0.164-59.15 [3][4][5][10][11]	0-5 [8][12]	0.03-40 [8][13]		Wetland
Sockeye Salmon	0-15	0-2 [14][15]	0.175-65 [3][4][5][6]			200 [5]	Lake

References: [1] Busch et al. (2011). [2] Cooney and Holzer (2006). [3] Bjornn and Reiser (1991). [4] Neuman and Newcombe (1977). [5] Woll, Albert, and Whited (2017). [6] Roberge et al. (2002). [7] Raleigh and Miller (1986). [8] Porter et al. (2008). [9] Agrawal et al. (2005). [10] Sloat, Reeves, and Christiansen (2017). [11] McMahon (1983). [12] Rosenfeld, Porter, and Parkinson (2000). [13] Burnett et al. (2007). [14] Lake (1999). [15] Hoopes (1972).

Other Tables

Table 2:

Excluded structures

Barrier Id	Modelled Crossing Id	Watercourse Name	Road Name	Structure Type	Reason For Exclusion	Method Of Exclusion	Reason	Notes	Supporting Links
197761	6800240	Trib to Horsefly River	unnamed	Stream crossing - Ford	Passable	Field assessment	Cattle trail/ford, location likely refers to historic crossing that has been decommissioned and abandoned at edge of channel
198871	6800319	Niquidet Creek	unnamed	Stream crossing - OBS	Passable	Field assessment	Pedestrian bridge across creek, not a barrier to fish passage
57292	6802284	Bassett Creek	500	Stream crossing - CBS	No key upstream habitat	Field assessment	Impassable natural barrier downstream
57317	6800584	Trib to McKinley Creek	R01350-524	Stream crossing - CBS	No key upstream habitat	Field assessment	No suitable habitat: small defined channel but no water = poor spawning, rearing, overwintering potential. No modeled key habitat upstream.
57596	6800587	Bassett Creek	R14189-4C	None	No structure	Field assessment	No stream crossing identified but large woody debris jam present and passable to fish
773d7d7c-11b7-4c8c-b761-ff1d4d60818a		Rat/Peter Creek	n/a	None	No structure	Field assessment	Dam confirmed to not exist (formerly structure 1100000814)
1006800520		Woodjam Creek	Private	None	No structure	Local knowledge	Access permission not granted. Landowners confirmed bridge/barrier no longer present
1006801356		Trib to Horsefly Lake	R01350	None	No structure	Field assessment	Crossing does not exist
a423c60a-dfb1-4414-bba3-bd57c89c6357		Gibbons Creek	n/a	Dam	Passable	Field assessment	Dam appears to be off channel with water flowing around the dam, no fish passage issues (formerly structure 1100001822)
197763		Niquidet Creek	unnamed	Stream crossing - Ford	Passable	Field assessment	Location is a cattle trail/ford, not a barrier to fish
40fc35b1-a834-4821-9c09-e8c64a646252		Niquidet Creek	n/a	None	No structure	Field assessment	Dam confirmed to not exist (formerly structure 1100000763)
17e18f43-e699-4e2c-ae73-e3f3e48de11f		Gibbons Creek	n/a	None	No structure	Field assessment	Dam confirmed to not exist (formerly structure 1100000243)
198875		Gibbons Creek	unnamed	Stream crossing - OBS	Passable	Field assessment	Road carried by a 2200 mm diameter OBS arch culvert that is 12 m long, does not represent a barrier to fish passage
1006801130		Wilmot Creek	unnamed	None	No structure	Field assessment	Crossing does not exist
1006800484		Molybdenite Creek	unnamed	None	No structure	Field assessment	Crossing does not exist
198161		Trib to Elbow Lake	unnamed	Stream crossing - OBS	Passable	Field assessment	Open bottom arch culvert
1006800298		Patenaude Creek	unnamed	None	No structure	Field assessment	Crossing does not exist

Table 3:

Non-actionable structures

Barrier Id	Modelled Crossing Id	Watercourse Name	Road Name	Structure Type	Structure Owner	Barrier Status	Partial Passability	Assessment Type Completed	Total Hab Gain Set	Num Barriers Set	Next Steps	Notes	Supporting Links
1200000002		Patenaude Creek	Private	Stream crossing - OBS	Private	BARRIER		Informal assessment	3.62	1	Barrier assessment (data deficient structures only)	Complete barrier assessment to verify status
126438	6800525	Trib to Horsefly River	Private	Stream crossing - CBS	Private	POTENTIAL		Barrier assessment	0.85	1	Engage with barrier owner	Can't access site (landowner refusal). Brian checking with local consultant if he knows anything about the crossing. Bring to regulator if no resolution.	http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/pscismap/imageViewer.do?habitatConfirmationId=1882
1006800220	6800220	Trib to Harpers Lake	unnamed	Other	Private	POTENTIAL		Other	0.69	2	Non-actionable
57430	6801719	Gifford Creek	Hendrix-McKinley	Stream crossing - CBS	FLNRO	BARRIER		Habitat confirmation	0.02	1	In-depth habitat investigation (data deficient structures only)	Coho present downstream, some steep sections to falls, salmonids throughout to falls	http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/pscismap/imageViewer.do?habitatConfirmationId=703
124271		MacLean Creek	Private	Stream crossing - CBS	Private	BARRIER		Habitat confirmation			Engage with barrier owner	Last assessed 2017. Can't access. Brian checking with local consultant on status of crossing. Bring in regulator if no resolution	http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/pscismap/imageViewer.do?habitatConfirmationId=681

Agrawal, A., R. S. Schick, E. P. Bjorkstedt, R. G. Szerlong, M. N. Goslin, B. C. Spence, T. H. Williams, and K. M. Burnett. 2005. Predicting the Potential for Historical Coho, Chinook, and Steelhead Habitat in Northern California. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Bjornn, T. C., and D. W. Reiser. 1991. “Habitat Requirements of Salmonids in Streams.” Influences of Forest and Rangeland Management on Salmonid Fishes and Their Habitats 19: 83–138.

Burnett, Kelly M., Gordon H. Reeves, Daniel J. Miller, Sharon Clarke, Ken Vance-Borland, and Kelly Christiansen. 2007. “Distribution of Salmon-Habitat Potential Relative to Landscape Characteristics and Implications for Conservation.” Ecol. Appl. 17 (1): 66–80.

Busch, D. S., M Sheer, K. Burnett, P. Mcelhany, and T. Cooney. 2011. “Landscape-Level Model to Predict Spawning Habitat for Lower Columbia River Fall Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus Tshawytscha).” River Research Applications 29: 291–312.

Cooney, T., and D. Holzer. 2006. Appendix c: Interior Columbia Basin Stream Type Chinook Salmon and Steelhead Populations: Habitat Intrinsic Potential Analysis. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Northwest Fisheries Center: Northwest Fisheries Center.

Hoopes, D. Y. 1972. Selection of Spawning Sites by Sockeye Salmon in Small Streams. Fishery Bulletin.

Lake, R. G. 1999. Activity and Spawning Behaviour in Spawning Sockeye Salmon. Thesis. UBC.

Mazany-Wright, N., S. M. Norris, N. W. R. Lapointe, and B. Rebellato. 2021a. “A Freshwater Connectivity Modelling Framework to Support Barrier Prioritization and Remediation in British Columbia.” Canadian Wildlife Federation, 2021a.

McMahon, T. E. 1983. “Habitat Suitability Index Models: Coho Salmon.” U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service 29.

Neuman, H. R., and C. P. Newcombe. 1977. Minimum Acceptable Stream Flows in British Columbia: A Review. Fisheries Management Report No. 70.

Porter, M., D. Pickard, K. Wieckowski, and K. Bryan. 2008. Developing Fish Habitat Models for Broad-Scale Forest Planning in the Southern Interior of B.C. ESSA Technologies Ltd.; B.C. Ministry of Environment.

Raleigh, R. F., and W. J. Miller. 1986. Habitat Suitability Index Models and Instream Flow Suitability Curves: Chinook Salmon. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Reports 82. USFW.

Roberge, M., J. B. M. Hume, C. K. Minns, and T. Slaney. 2002. Life History Characteristics of Freshwater Fishes Occurring in British Columbia and the Yukon, with Major Emphasis on Stream Habitat Characteristics. Cultus Lake, British Columbia: Fisheries; Oceans Canada, Marine Environment; Habitat Science Division.

Rosenfeld, Jordan, Marc Porter, and Eric Parkinson. 2000. “Habitat Factors Affecting the Abundance and Distribution of Juvenile Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus Clarki) and Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus Kisutch).” Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 57 (4): 766–74.

Sheer, M. B., D. S. Busch, E. Gilbert, J. M. Bayer, S. Lanigan, J. L. Schei, K. M. Burnett, and D. Miller. 2009. Development and Management of Fish Intrinsic Potential Data and Methodologies: State of the IP 2008 Summary Report. Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership Series 2009—4, 56 pp.

Sloat, Matthew R., Gordon H. Reeves, and Kelly R. Christiansen. 2017. “Stream Network Geomorphology Mediates Predicted Vulnerability of Anadromous Fish Habitat to Hydrologic Change in Southeast Alaska.” Glob. Chang. Biol. 23 (2): 604–20.

Woll, C., D. Albert, and D. Whited. 2017. A Preliminary Classification and Mapping of Salmon Ecological Systems in the Nushagak and Kvichak Watersheds. Alaska: The Nature Conservancy.