2 Background

The study area includes the FWCP Peace Region with a focus to date on traditional territories of the Tse’khene First Nations. In 2023, field assessments were completed with the Parsnip River, Carp River and Crooked River watershed groups (Figure 2.1).

In 2019/2020, following a literature review, analysis of fish habitat modelling data, the Provincial Stream Crossing Inventory System (PSCIS) and a community scoping exercise within the McLeod Lake Indian Band habitat confirmation assessments were conducted at 17 sites throughout the Parsnip River watershed with 10 crossings rated as high priorities for rehabilitation and three crossings rated as moderate priorities for restoration. An engineering design for site 125179 on a tributary to the Missinka River was also completed through the 2019/2020 project. In 2021/2022, project activities reconvened through FWCP directed project PEA-F22-F-3577-DCA. Partners were engaged, funding was raised, planning was conducted and reporting was completed to initiate restoration activities of high priority crossings. Materials were purchased and permitting was put in place to prep for replacement of the twin culverts on the Missinka River tributary with a clear-span bridge.

In 2022/2023, this collaborative project leveraged ongoing connectivity restoration initiatives in the province and engaged multiple partners to catalyze fish passage restoration activities at high-priority sites identified in 2019/2020 and 2021/2022. Key accomplishments include the replacement of PSCIS crossing 125179, prioritization of two crossings on the Chuchinka-Table FSR for replacement in 2024-2025 (with engineering designs commissioned and materials purchased), and field assessments including fish sampling at high priority crossing 125000 on a tributary to the Parsnip River near Arctic Lake.

knitr::include_graphics("fig/peace_fish_passage_2023.jpeg")

Figure 2.1: Overview map of Study Area

2.1 Tse’khene

The Parsnip River watershed is located within the south-eastern portion of the 108,000 km² traditional territory of the Tse’khene from the McLeod Lake Indian Band. The Tse’khene “People of the Rocks” are a south westerly extension of the Athabascan speaking people of northern Canada. They were nomadic hunters whose language belongs to the Beaver-Sarcee-Tse’khene branch of Athapaskan (“History Who We Are” 2023). Extensive work is underway to preserve the language with resources such as First Voices available online and in app form for iphone and ipad devices.

The continental divide separates watersheds flowing north into the Arctic Ocean via the Mackenzie River and south and west into the Pacific Ocean via the Fraser River (Figure 2.1). The Parsnip River is a 6th order stream with a watershed that drains an area of 5597km². The mainstem of the river flows within the Rocky Mountain Trench in a north direction into Williston Reservoir starting from the continental divide adjacent to Arctic Lakes. Major tributaries include the Misinchinka, Colbourne, Reynolds, Anzac, Table, Hominka and Missinka sub-basins which drain the western slopes of the Hart Ranges of the Rocky Mountains. The Parsnip River has a mean annual discharge of 150.4 m³/s with flow patterns typical of high elevation watersheds on the west side of the northern Rocky Mountains which receive large amounts of precipitation as snow leading to peak levels of discharge during snowmelt, typically from May to July (Figures 2.2 - 2.3).

Construction of the 183 m high and 2134 m long W.A.C. Bennett Dam was completed in 1967 at Hudson’s Hope, BC, creating the Williston Reservoir (Hirst 1991). Filling of the 375km² reservoir was complete in 1972 and flooded a substantial portion of the Parsnip River and major tributary valleys forming what is now known as the Peace and Parsnip reaches. The replacement of riverine habitat with an inundated reservoir environment resulted in profound changes to the ecology, resource use and human settlement patterns in these systems (Hagen et al. 2015a; Pearce et al. 2019; Stamford, Hagen, and Williamson 2017). Prior to the filling of the reservoir, the Pack River, into which McLeod Lake flows, was a major tributary to the Parsnip River. The Pack River currently enters the Williston Reservoir directly as the historic location of the confluence of the two rivers lies within the reservoir’s footprint.

# knitr::include_graphics("fig/hydrology1-1.png")  ##left this here in case we want to go back to having this build from scratch.

# img <- png::readPNG("fig/hydrology1.png")
# grid::grid.raster(img)

knitr::include_graphics("fig/hydrograph_07EE007.png")

Figure 2.2: Parsnip River Above Misinchinka River (Station #07EE007 - Lat 55.08194 Lon -122.913063). Available daily discharge data from 1967 to 2019.

# img <- png::readPNG("fig/hydrology2.png")
# grid::grid.raster(img)

knitr::include_graphics("fig/hydrology_stats_07EE007.png")

Figure 2.3: Summary discharge statistics (annual maximum, minimum, mean and standard deviation) for Parsnip River at hydrometric station #07EE007.

2.2 Fisheries

Fish species recorded in the Parsnip River watershed are detailed in Table 2.1 (MoE 2019a). In addition to flooding related to the formation of the Williston Reservoir, transmission lines, gas pipelines, rail, road networks, forestry, elevated water temperatures, interrupted connectivity, invasion from non-native species and insect infestations affecting forested areas pose threats to fisheries values in the Parsnip River watershed (Hagen et al. 2015b; Stamford, Hagen, and Williamson 2017; Hagen and Weber 2019a; Comittee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada 2012). A brief summary of trends and knowledge status related to Arctic grayling, bull trout, kokanee, mountain whitefish and rainbow trout in Williston Watershed streams is provided in Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program (2020) with a more detailed review of the state of knowledge for Parsnip River watershed populations of Arctic grayling and bull trout provided below.

fiss_species_table <- readr::read_csv(paste0(getwd(), '/data/inputs_extracted/fiss_species_table.csv'))

fiss_species_table %>% 
  fpr::fpr_kable(caption_text = 'Fish species recorded in the Parsnip River, Carp Lake, and Crooked River watershed groups.', 
                 footnote_text = 'COSEWIC abbreviations : 
                 SC - Special concern 
                 DD - Data deficient
                 NAR - Not at risk
                 
                 BC List definitions : 
                 Yellow - Species that is apparently secure 
                 Blue - Species that is of special concern
                 Exotic - Species that have been moved beyond their natural range as a result of human activity
                 ',
                 scroll = gitbook_on)

Table 2.1: Fish species recorded in the Parsnip River, Carp Lake, and Crooked River watershed groups.

Scientific Name	Species Name	Species Code	BC List	Provincial FRPA	COSEWIC	SARA	Parsnip	Carp	Crooked
Catostomus catostomus	Longnose Sucker	LSU	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Catostomus columbianus	Bridgelip Sucker	BSU	Yellow	–	–	–	–	–	Yes
Catostomus commersonii	White Sucker	WSU	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Catostomus macrocheilus	Largescale Sucker	CSU	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Coregonus clupeaformis	Lake Whitefish	LW	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Cottus aleuticus	Coastrange Sculpin (formerly Aleutian Sculpin)	CAL	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	–	–
Cottus asper	Prickly Sculpin	CAS	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Cottus cognatus	Slimy Sculpin	CCG	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	–
Cottus hubbsi	Mottled Sculpin	CBA	Blue	–	SC (Nov 2010)	1-SC (Jun 2003)	Yes	–	–
Couesius plumbeus	Lake Chub	LKC	Yellow	–	DD	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Esox lucius	Northern Pike	NP	Yellow	–	–	–	–	–	Yes
Hybognathus hankinsoni	Brassy Minnow	BMC	No Status	–	–	–	–	Yes	Yes
Lota lota	Burbot	BB	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Mylocheilus caurinus	Peamouth Chub	PCC	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Oncorhynchus mykiss	Rainbow Trout	RB	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Oncorhynchus nerka	Kokanee	KO	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	–	–
Osmerus dentex	Rainbow Smelt	RSM	Unknown	–	–	–	Yes	–	–
Prosopium coulterii	Pygmy Whitefish	PW	Yellow	–	NAR (Nov 2016)	–	Yes	–	–
Prosopium cylindraceum	Round Whitefish	RW	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	–	–
Prosopium williamsoni	Mountain Whitefish	MW	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Ptychocheilus oregonensis	Northern Pikeminnow	NSC	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Rhinichthys cataractae	Longnose Dace	LNC	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	–	Yes
Richardsonius balteatus	Redside Shiner	RSC	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Salvelinus confluentus	Bull Trout	BT	Blue	Y (Jun 2006)	SC (Nov 2012)	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Salvelinus fontinalis	Brook Trout	EB	Exotic	–	–	–	Yes	–	Yes
Salvelinus malma	Dolly Varden	DV	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Salvelinus namaycush	Lake Trout	LT	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
Thymallus arcticus	Arctic Grayling	GR	Yellow	–	–	–	Yes	–	–
–	Chub (General)	CBC	–	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
–	Dace (General)	DC	–	–	–	–	Yes	–	–
–	Minnow (General)	C	–	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
–	Sculpin (General)	CC	–	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
–	Squanga	SQ	–	–	–	–	–	–	Yes
–	Sucker (General)	SU	–	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
–	Whitefish (General)	WF	–	–	–	–	Yes	Yes	Yes
* COSEWIC abbreviations : SC - Special concern DD - Data deficient NAR - Not at risk BC List definitions : Yellow - Species that is apparently secure Blue - Species that is of special concern Exotic - Species that have been moved beyond their natural range as a result of human activity

Bull Trout - sa’ba

Tse’khene Elders from the McLeod Lake Indian Band report that sa’ba (bull trout) size and abundance has decreased in all rivers and tributaries from the reservoir with more injured and diseased fish captured in recent history than was common in the past (Pearce et al. 2019) .

Bull Trout populations of the Williston Reservoir watershed are included within the Western Arctic population ‘Designatable Unit 10’, which, in 2012, received a ranking of ‘Special Concern’ by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC 2012a). They were added to Schedule 1 under the Species of Risk Act in 2019 (Species Registry Canada 2020) and are also considered of special concern (blue-listed) provincially (BC Species & Ecosystem Explorer 2020). Some or all of the long-term foot survey index sections of four Williston Reservoir spawning tributaries (Davis Creek, Misinchinka River, Point Creek, and Scott Creek), have been surveyed within 16 of the 19 years between 2001 and 2019 (16 of 19 in Davis River, 10 years over a 13-year period in the Misinchinka River, 11 years over a 14-year period for Point Creek, and 9 years over an 11-year period for Scott Creek (Hagen, Spendlow, and Pillipow 2020).

A study of sa’ba critical habitats in the Parsnip River was conducted in 2014 with the Misinchinka and Anzac systems identified as the most important systems for adfluvial (large bodied) bull trout spawners. The Table River was also highlighted as an important spawning destination. Other watersheds identified as containing runs of large bodied bull troutspawners included the Colbourne, Reynolds, Hominka and Missinka River with potentially less than 50 spawners utilizing each sub-basin (Hagen et al. 2015a). Hagen and Weber (2019b) have synthesized a large body of information regarding limiting factors, enhancement potential, critical habitats and conservation status for bull trout of the Williston Reservoir and the reader is encouraged to review this work for context. They have recommended experimental enhancements within a monitoring framework for Williston Reservoir bull trout (some spawning and rearing in Parsnip River mainstem and tributaries) which include stream fertilization, side channel development, riparian restoration and fish access improvement.

In 2018, sub-basins of the Anzac River watershed, Homininka River, Missinka River and Table River watersheds were designated as fisheries sensitive watersheds under the authority of the Forest and Range Practices Act due to significant downstream fisheries values and significant watershed sensitivity (P. G. Beaudry 2013a, 2014a, 2014b, 2013b). Special management is required in these watersheds to protect habitat for fish species including bull trout and Arctic grayling including measures (among others) to limit equivalent clearcut area, reduce impacts to natural stream channel morphology, retain old growth attributes and maintain fish habitat/movement (Forest and Range Practices Act 2018).

Arctic Grayling - dusk’ihje

Tse’khene Elders from the McLeod Lake Indian Band report that Arctic grayling numbers have declined dramatically since the flooding of the reservoir and that few dusk’ihje (Arctic Grayling) have been caught in the territory in the past 30 years (Pearce et al. 2019).

Since impoundment of the Williston Reservoir, it appears that physical habitat and ecological changes have been the most significant factors limiting Arctic grayling productivity. Although these changes are not well understood they have likely resulted in the inundation of key low gradient juvenile rearing and overwintering habitats, isolation of previously connected populations and increases in abundance of predators such as bull trout (Shrimpton, Roberts, and Clarke 2012; Hagen, Pillipow, and Gantner 2018). Rapid increases in industrial activity and angler access in the Parsnip River watershed pose significant risks to Arctic Grayling productivity with these threats primarily linked to forestry and pipeline initiatives (Hagen and Stamford 2021).

A detailed review of dusk’ihje life history can be referenced in Stamford, Hagen, and Williamson (2017). Migration of mature adult dusk’ihje (Arctic grayling) occurs in the spring with arrival at known spawning locations coinciding with water temperatures of 4\(^\circ\)C. Spawning in the Parsnip watershed appears to occur between late-May and late-June within sites located primarily within the lower reaches of the Anzac and Table rivers as well as within the Parsnip River mainstem. Side-channel and multiple-channel locations containing small gravels appear to be selected for spawning. Currently, the primary distribution of Williston Arctic grayling appears to be among fourth order and larger streams (Williamson and Zimmerman 2005; Stamford, Hagen, and Williamson 2017). Stewart et al. (2007) report that Arctic grayling spawn in large and small tributaries to rivers and lakes, intermittent streams, within mainstem rivers as well as lakes, most commonly at tributary mouths. Although past study results indicate that 0+ grayling appeared to overwinter in lower reaches of larger tributaries (i.e. Table, Anzac rivers) as well as the Parsnip River and that few age-1+ grayling have been sampled in tributaries, habitat use in small tributaries and the extent they are connected with the mainstem habitats of all core areas is not well understood. Between 1995 and 2019, Arctic grayling population monitoring has been conducted in the Table River in nine out of 25 years (8 years for the Anzac) using snorkel surveys. Results from 2018 and 2019 are intended to contribute to the assessment of the conservation status of the species in the Parsnip Core area (Hagen, Pillipow, and Gantner 2018). In 2019, preliminary telemetry results indicate that both Arctic grayling and bull trout rely on the Parsnip River mainstem for overwinter residencies. Arctic grayling move into the tributaries beginning in April, and become widespread across the watershed by June.

A 5 year study on Parsnip River watershed dusk’ihje abundance and trend are discussed in Hagen and Stamford (2023) where they report that the most productive habitats for Arctic grayling summer rearing are within the Anzac River and Table River. Although estimated abundance is lower than in the Anzac and Table, productive summer rearing habitats for adult Arctic grayling in the upper Parsnip River watershed are distributed between 36-25 km of the Missinka River and from 48-32 km of the Hominka River. Hagen and Stamford (2021) report that within the Anzac River, a 30-km stretch from a chute obstruction at 47 km to 16 km is assumed to provide productive summer rearing habitats for adults as it is characterized by a high abundance of Arctic grayling. Although the spatial distribution of high Arctic grayling abundance in the Table River has not been determined through reconnaissance surveys it has been observed to span at least a 20-km zone from the waterfall migration barrier at 37 km to 18 km.

Spatial ecology studies in the Parsnip between 2018 and 2021 has been reported on by Martins et al. (2022) with results related to:

• temperature modeling and spatio-temporal patterns in thermal habitat,
• telemetry data modeling and arctic grayling spatial ecology, and
• trophic relationships between Arctic grayling and bull trout

A review of available fisheries data for the Parsnip River watershed stratified by different habitat characteristics can provide insight into which habitats may provide the highest intrinsic value for fish species based on the number of fish captured in those habitats in past assessment work (Figures 2.4 - 2.6). It should be noted however that it should not be assumed that all habitat types have been sampled in a non-biased fashion or that particular sites selected do not have a disproportionate influence on the overall dataset composition (ie. fish salvage sites are often located adjacent to construction sites which are more commonly located near lower gradient stream reaches).

# fiss_sum <- readr::read_csv(file = paste0(getwd(), '/data/extracted_inputs/fiss_sum.csv'))
fiss_sum_grad <- readr::read_csv(file = paste0(getwd(), '/data/inputs_extracted/fiss_sum_grad.csv'))
fiss_sum_width <- readr::read_csv(file = paste0(getwd(), '/data/inputs_extracted/fiss_sum_width.csv'))
fiss_sum_wshed <- readr::read_csv(file = paste0(getwd(), '/data/inputs_extracted/fiss_sum_wshed.csv')) 
  



# A summary of historical westslope cutthrout trout observations in the Elk River watershed group by average gradient category of associated stream segment is provided in Figure \@ref(fig:fish-wct-bar). Of `r wct_elkr_grad %>% filter(gradient_id == 3) %>% pull(total)` observations, `r wct_elkr_grad %>% filter(gradient_id == 3) %>% pull(Percent) + wct_elkr_grad %>% filter(gradient_id == 5) %>% pull(Percent) + wct_elkr_grad %>% filter(gradient_id == 8) %>% pull(Percent)`% were within stream segments with average gradients ranging from 0 - 8%.  A total of `r wct_elkr_grad %>% filter(gradient_id == 3) %>% pull(Percent)`% of historic observations were within stream segments with gradients between 0 - 3%, `r wct_elkr_grad %>% filter(gradient_id == 5) %>% pull(Percent)`% were within stream segments with gradients ranging from 3 - 5% and `r wct_elkr_grad %>% filter(gradient_id == 5) %>% pull(Percent)`% were within stream segments with gradients between 5 - 8% [@data_fish_obs; @norris2020bcfishobs]. 

my_caption <- 'Summary of historic salmonid observations vs. stream gradient category for the Parsnip River watershed group.'
fiss_sum_grad %>% 
  select(-gradient_id) %>% 
  fpr::fpr_kable(caption_text = my_caption,
                 scroll = gitbook_on)

Table 2.2: Summary of historic salmonid observations vs. stream gradient category for the Parsnip River watershed group.

species_code	Gradient	Count	total_spp	Percent
BT	0 - 3 %	160	236	68
BT	03 - 5 %	29	236	12
BT	05 - 8 %	21	236	9
BT	08 - 15 %	20	236	8
BT	15 - 22 %	6	236	3
GR	0 - 3 %	224	230	97
GR	03 - 5 %	2	230	1
GR	05 - 8 %	2	230	1
GR	08 - 15 %	2	230	1
KO	0 - 3 %	17	17	100
RB	0 - 3 %	327	415	79
RB	03 - 5 %	32	415	8
RB	05 - 8 %	22	415	5
RB	08 - 15 %	27	415	7
RB	15 - 22 %	7	415	2

##bar graph
plot_grad <- fiss_sum_grad %>% 
  filter(gradient_id != 99) %>% 
  ggplot(aes(x = Gradient, y = Percent)) +
  geom_bar(stat = "identity")+
  facet_wrap(~species_code, ncol = 2)+
  theme_bw(base_size = 11)+
  labs(x = "Average Stream Gradient", y = "Occurrences (%)")
plot_grad

Figure 2.4: Summary of historic salmonid observations vs. stream gradient category for the Parsnip River watershed group.

my_caption <- 'Summary of historic salmonid observations vs. channel width category for the Parsnip River watershed group.'
fiss_sum_width %>% 
  select(-width_id) %>% 
  fpr::fpr_kable(caption_text = my_caption,
                 scroll = gitbook_on)

Table 2.3: Summary of historic salmonid observations vs. channel width category for the Parsnip River watershed group.

species_code	Width	Count	total_spp	Percent
BT	0 - 2m	11	236	5
BT	02 - 04m	25	236	11
BT	04 - 06m	29	236	12
BT	06 - 10m	35	236	15
BT	10 - 15m	30	236	13
BT	15m+	103	236	44
BT	–	3	236	1
GR	04 - 06m	5	230	2
GR	06 - 10m	7	230	3
GR	10 - 15m	14	230	6
GR	15m+	200	230	87
GR	–	4	230	2
KO	0 - 2m	1	17	6
KO	06 - 10m	3	17	18
KO	15m+	1	17	6
KO	–	12	17	71
RB	0 - 2m	23	415	6
RB	02 - 04m	51	415	12
RB	04 - 06m	37	415	9
RB	06 - 10m	36	415	9
RB	10 - 15m	34	415	8
RB	15m+	141	415	34
RB	–	93	415	22

##bar graph
plot_width <- fiss_sum_width %>% 
  filter(!is.na(width_id)) %>%
  ggplot(aes(x = Width, y = Percent)) +
  geom_bar(stat = "identity")+
  facet_wrap(~species_code, ncol = 2)+
  theme_bw(base_size = 11)+
  labs(x = "Channel Width", y = "Occurrences (%)")
plot_width

Figure 2.5: Summary of historic salmonid observations vs. channel width category for the Parsnip River watershed group.

my_caption <- 'Summary of historic salmonid observations vs. watershed size category for the Parsnip River watershed group.'
fiss_sum_wshed %>% 
  fpr::fpr_kable(caption_text = my_caption,
                 scroll = gitbook_on)

Table 2.4: Summary of historic salmonid observations vs. watershed size category for the Parsnip River watershed group.

species_code	Watershed	count_wshd	total_spp	Percent
BT	0 - 25km2	89	236	38
BT	25 - 50km2	27	236	11
BT	50 - 75km2	12	236	5
BT	75 - 100km2	9	236	4
BT	100km2+	99	236	42
GR	0 - 25km2	7	230	3
GR	25 - 50km2	5	230	2
GR	50 - 75km2	9	230	4
GR	75 - 100km2	6	230	3
GR	100km2+	203	230	88
KO	0 - 25km2	11	17	65
KO	25 - 50km2	1	17	6
KO	50 - 75km2	2	17	12
KO	75 - 100km2	2	17	12
KO	100km2+	1	17	6
RB	0 - 25km2	210	415	51
RB	25 - 50km2	22	415	5
RB	50 - 75km2	26	415	6
RB	75 - 100km2	17	415	4
RB	100km2+	140	415	34

plot_wshed <- fiss_sum_wshed %>%
  # filter(!is.na(upstream_area_ha)) %>%
  ggplot(aes(x = Watershed, y = Percent)) +
  geom_bar(stat = "identity")+
  facet_wrap(~species_code, ncol = 2)+
  theme_bw(base_size = 11)+
  labs(x = "Watershed Area", y = "Occurrences (%)")+
  theme(axis.text.x=element_text(angle = 45, hjust = 1))
plot_wshed

Figure 2.6: Summary of historic salmonid observations vs. watershed size category for the Parsnip River watershed group.