Table 1: Fish Species Profile of the Taleomey River Watershed……………….……..…6

Table 2: Recommended Supplemental Fish Sampling………………………….…....…18

Table 3: Priority Unassessed 1^st and 2^nd Order Tributaries………………………....…..20

Table 4: Taleomey Watershed: Prioritized Stream Reaches……………….……...…….21

1. INTRODUCTION

1. Background

Past land management practices can degrade the productive capacity of forest lands and aquatic habitats. In order to assess the impact of past forest practices on fish habitat, industry, government and environmental specialists have developed assessment procedures for fish habitat type at both the overview and site level. This assessment aims to determine the status of impairment to fish habitat as a result of past forest development and other human impacts.

In February, 1998 the Mid Coast Operations of International Forest Products Limited of Hagensborg, B.C. retained Beak International Inc. to conduct Overview Fish habitat assessments of the Taleomey River watershed (the Watershed). The overall scope of the project involved Overview Fisheries Habitat Assessments as defined in the Watershed Restoration Program protocols.

This report details the results of these assessments. Methods, results and discussions are presented separately (Chapters 2 through 4). To effectively prioritise critical areas within the watershed, we present a scoring system that incorporates weighted ratings of fish habitat potential with upslope hazard potential, Section 4.2.

2. Project Objectives

The purpose of these studies is to qualitatively and quantitatively assess specific parameters of fisheries habitat within the identified sub-basins. Key components of these assessments include:

• identification of logging related limiting factors on fish production;
• identification of opportunities for fish and riparian habitat restoration.

1. Study Area

The Taleomey River watershed is situated in the Central Coast region of British Columbia among the Coast Mountains of the Pacific Ranges (Figure 1). The watershed demonstrates dramatic relief in a drainage basin of approximately 35,000 hectares. Elevations within the watershed range from 0 to approximately 2800 metres. Most streams originate in the high alpine with an early summer stream flow peak occurring in response to glacial and snow melt, with flows diminishing towards late summer. Streams tributary to the lower five reaches of the Taleomey mainstem typically show moderate gradients (<10 %) in their short, unconfined lower reaches but exhibit severe gradient increases (up to 36%) with their climb up the valley walls. Generally, the Taleomey watershed exhibits greater hillslope coupling with avalanche trails and small first order streams in its upper reaches where the deposition of sediments to the mainstem is most evident.

The area experiences a climate typical of the winter-wet, maritime conditions of the coastal province with mean annual precipitation exceeding 250 cm. Winters tend to be mild, with snow remaining for many months at the higher elevations.

The watershed is situated primarily within the Coastal Western Hemlock biogeoclimatic zones with the higher elevations in the Mountain Hemlock and Alpine Tundra biogeoclimatic zones. The primary vegetation type in the area at this time is a forest dominated by western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). In a minority of areas the forest also contains codominant Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii).

Logging has been carried out in the watershed since 1954. An airstrip is located on the south side of the Taleomey east of the Tarrant Creek confluence with the Whonnock logging camp located nearby (Holowatiuk et al 1986).

Following the protocols and procedures detailed in Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 8; Fish Habitat Assessment Procedures, April 1996, overview assessments were conducted for the mainstem and identified tributaries within the Watershed. The objectives of the Overview assessment were to:

• determine target fish species;
• assess fisheries habitat from the analysis of available maps and airphotos and the review of available fisheries reports;
• identify forestry related limiting factors on fish production; and
• identify potential areas for higher level assessments leading to possible opportunities for fish habitat restoration.

2. METHODS

The Overview fish habitat assessment concentrated primarily on establishing the historical target fish species distributions within the watershed, a general assessment of stream channels with respect to fish habitat quality and quantity and a predictive assessment of the potential for upslope processes to impact fish habitat.

Fish distribution information was gleaned from several sources. FHIIP records, FISS files and maps, made available from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and consultant reports covering adult and juvenile salmonid reconnaissance studies were obtained. Discussions with regional fisheries personnel ( M. Ramsey, pers. comm.) were also conducted. The interviews were necessary to obtain anecdotal information regarding fisheries resources of the study area, particularly where inventory records were deficient. Results of the fish distribution overview are detailed in Form 1 (Appendix 1).

As well as the aerial photograph resolution would permit, an overview of fish habitat condition was performed. The parameters of concern are detailed in Form 2 and have been completed to the extent that available documentary and photographic resources would allow. From the results of the fish habitat condition summary, a preliminary habitat assessment was completed. Results of this condition summary as well as those of the preliminary habitat assessments are tabulated in Forms 2 and 3 respectively (Appendix 2).

Habitat concerns for the Taleomey River mainstem and each major tributary are detailed by reach in Section 3.2.

4. RESULTS

1. Target Species

Review of the available data indicated the presence of eight fish species in the Taleomey River system, Table 1.

Each of the salmonids occurring in this watershed should be considered candidate species for habitat restoration efforts. Dolly varden and resident Rainbow trout are reported as inhabiting those areas of the watershed where turbidity concerns are not at issue and therefore restoration efforts would not likely effect habitats commonly associated with these species (Abbott et al 1986). Data indicate, however, that spawning and rearing of the remaining six species occur within the lower reaches of the Taleomey tributaries and the mainstem where siltation and turbidity may negatively impact success.

Table 1. Fish Species Profile of the Taleomey River Watershed

Species	Common Name	Code
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha	Chinook salmon	CH
O. gorbuscha	Pink salmon	PK
O. nerka	Sockeye salmon	SK
O. keta	Chum salmon	CM
O. kisutch	Coho salmon	CO
Salvelinus malma	Dolly varden	DV
O. mykiss mykiss O. mykiss mykiss	Rainbow trout Steelhead trout	RB ST
Cottus asper	Prickly sculpin	CAS

1. Salmonid Distributions

As indicated above, the target fish species of the Taleomey watershed include each of the five Pacific salmon species, as well as Rainbow trout and Dolly varden. Reviews of the relevant information indicate that salmon are restricted to the mainstem of Taleomey River and the lower reach of Km 6, Km 11, Km 12, Km 18, and Km 38 Creeks .

Review of the available documentary information did however indicate gaps in the fish distribution records. The inventory and FISS data have not identified the upstream limits of rearing or spawning on most of these tributaries or the mainstem of the Taleomey. New information may be required to complete target fish distributions which in turn will be critical in determining those areas to be considered for Level 1 habitat assessments.

2. Habitat Concerns

The Overview fish habitat assessments have attempted to identify areas of special concern. Such areas include:

• habitat availability for the target species;
• reaches with known or suspected degradation or those that demonstrate a vulnerability to logging impacts; and
• reaches which exhibit potential migration barriers.

The overview fish habitat assessment procedures contain tables for tabulating habitat conditions and value. Habitat conditions were addressed by completing these tables to the extent possible and within the limits imposed by the available data and airphotos. For example, bankfull widths are not recorded for the tributaries on Form 2 because canopy closure and the relatively large scale of the air photos do not permit the stream channel to be viewed in sufficient detail. As well, disturbance type, off-channel habitat, barriers, pools, and LWD are often recorded as unknown for the same reasons.

Below, habitat concerns are summarized by stream on a reach by reach basis with data presented in tabular format (Forms 2 and 3) in Appendix 2.

1. Taleomey River

Reach 1

Fisheries habitat values have been rated as high for Reach 1 of the Taleomey River.

This reach functions as a migration channel for each of the five salmon species as well as Dolly Varden char, steelhead and rainbow trout. The side channels contain holding pools for migrating adult pink salmon, and represent important spawning areas for both pink and chum salmon. While chum salmon prefer side channels with clear water inflows, pink are more widely distributed throughout the width of this reach (Abbott et al 1986). Coho spawners were also observed in this reach during a 1985 reconnaissance program (Abbott et al 1986).

Upslope impact potential is considered low along this reach. An alluvial fan comprises this channel with adjacent banks demonstrating only gradual slopes and relatively low relief. Sedimentation from the deposition of bed materials transported from upstream during flood events appear to pose the only potentially negative impacts.

Evident changes to this channel over the past two decades indicate sediment deposition. Significant flood events do not appear to have occurred during the interval between 1977 and 1996; those years in which air photos of the watershed were examined during these analyses. Lateral migrations and braiding of the channel in this reach have occurred in response to the development of sediment wedges and side bars; the majority of which now support significant deciduous vegetation.

Reach 2

Moderate fisheries habitat values have been assigned to this reach of the Taleomey River. Reach 2 is a narrow canyon which serves as a migration corridor for each species of salmon and trout rearing in the Watershed. Chum salmon likely hold in the canyon pools of this reach (McGivney et al 1985). The substrate consists primarily of bedrock, large boulders and cobble, and therefore contain little suitable spawning materials (McGivney et al 1985). Rearing habitat is also absent due to the rapid change in velocities and flow characteristics in response to discharge. Although rated as only moderate in terms of habitat value, this reach is vital to coho salmon for holding areas as this species arrives in this watershed months prior to their peak spawning period. The deep pools and cover associated with channels of this type allow coho the opportunity to mature while minimizing the risk of predation.

Potential upslope impacts are rated as moderate and are seen as mass wasting and erosion. A forest service road situated along the southern bank of this reach appears to deliver small amounts of fine sediment to the channel during periods of precipitation while the side casts exhibit some evidence of past failures, and likely contribute coarser sediments directly to the channel.

Currently, well established side bar vegetation in this reach is the only observable change over the past twenty years, again indicating no recent significant disturbances from immediately upstream have occurred.

Reach 3

High fisheries habitat values have been assigned to Reach 3. This reach contains extensive braided sections and side channels and totals approximately 7.6 km in length. The clear water fed from Tarrant and Km 11 Creeks upstream flush the side channels of this reach and offer optimum chum spawning habitat. Pink spawners also utilize this reach extensively, and the majority of coho spawning in the system occur in this reach. Sockeye have also been observed spawning in this reach, and the majority of the 23 chinook salmon that were observed in 1984 were also found in the side channels downstream from Tarrant and Km 11 Creeks (McGivney et al 1985, Abbott et al 1986). The extensive network of side channels also represent important rearing areas for chinook and coho salmon as well as steelhead juveniles (Holowatiuk et al. 1986).

Upslope impact potential is rated as moderate in Reach 3. Those areas where the valley walls rise abruptly from the channel may be prone to mass wasting while erosion from exposed soils associated with the service roads and cutblocks contribute fine sediment to the channel. All Forest Service roads are set back far enough from the mainstem and side channels so as not to isolate or block fish access to these areas.

This section of the mainstem is similar to Reach 1 in that channel width and lateral migration have diminished over the previous twenty years. Successional vegetation layers are now present where active channels had flowed until only recently.

Reach 4

Fisheries habitat values in this reach are rated as moderate. Reach 4 is a short channel of only seven-hundred and twenty metres and similar to Reach 2 with its narrow entrenched canyon. The habitat types are primarily rapids and glides with some deep pools (McGivney et al 1985). This reach contains no spawning or rearing areas but is rated as moderate fisheries value due to its important holding areas for upstream migrants in the system.

Upslope impact potential can be considered low. Stable banks along both shores of the reach are undisturbed and riparian areas are densely vegetated with a mature conifer forest. Any potential disturbance would likely result from minor erosion and originate from the bridge crossing. No temporal changes in channel morphology over the past twenty years are evident within this reach.

Reach 5

At 12.43 km, this is the longest of the Taleomey mainstem’s ten reaches. Fisheries habitat value is rated as high throughout the length of this reach. For the most part, this reach is similar to Reach 3 with respect to channel morphology and pattern. This reach has been divided into three sub-reaches due to the presence of two short, (<250 m) confined channel segments separating the longer braided sections of channel. This long reach contains three large braided sections and numerous side channels. Three major tributaries, Km 12 Creek, Km 18 and Km 38 Creeks, are tributary to this reach. Side channels are characterized by riffle and glide habitat, with substrates dominated by gravels and cobbles (McGivney et al 1985). The side channels contain important chinook, chum and pink spawning areas, as well as rearing areas for juvenile chinook and steelhead. A fall run of chum were observed spawning in this reach above Km 18 Creek (Abbott et al 1986).

Upslope impact potential in the lower of the three sections is considered moderate. Evidence of natural erosion and mass wasting from the adjacent slopes indicate that fine and coarse sediments periodically enter the channel. Sedimentation from the deposition of bedload materials transported from upstream may also impact fish habitats. Given the sensitivity of the habitat in the lower section of this reach, even small influxes of material may prove deleterious to incubating eggs or rearing juveniles.

The middle section of Reach 5 has been assigned a moderate to high upslope impact potential. Here the valley walls are steeper than those of the adjacent upper and lower sections and a service road and bridge crossing offer greater opportunity for erosion of fine sediments and failure of side castings associated with the road construction. Here also, aggrading from in-channel sediment transport poses a potential hazard to sensitive fish habitat.

Reach 6

Fisheries habitat value is rated as high as previous fisheries reconnaissance studies suggest the presence of chum and pink salmon spawners (McGivney et al 1985). The presence of large and mixed gravels would also facilitate chinook spawning in this reach. Reconnaissance studies also report the presence of coho juveniles throughout the system, and indeed the braided channels characteristic of this low gradient (2%) reach offer cover for rearing salmonid juveniles. Contractor reports from past reconnaissance studies initially divided the mainstem of the Taleomey River among five reaches (McGivney et al 1985, Abbott et al 1986, Holowatiuk et al 1986). Analysis of TRIM maps and aerial photographs show that significant changes in channel pattern, confinement and morphology upstream of the upper most reach break indicates a requirement to further divide the ‘old’ Reach 5. As a consequence, this initial macro-reach was split into another four reaches, including the lake which forms Reach 9 comprising part of the headwaters of the Taleomey.

The upslope impact potential through Reach 6 is considered high. Major natural impacts and channel disturbances have included mass wasting, torrenting, and erosion. Although the valley walls exhibit partial coupling with the mainstem channel, the channel width in this reach is sufficient to allow the deposition of bed material transported from upstream as water velocities and depths decrease. Sedimentation has likely resulted in the infilling of pools within the mainstem channel leaving only the side channels to offer refugia for rearing salmonid juveniles.

Reach 7

Fish habitat values are considered moderate in this three kilometer, 5% gradient reach. As no barriers are reported along the mainstem of the Taleomey, it must be assumed that access to the headwater lake (Reach 8) is achievable by all species encountered in the lower reaches. These include chinook, coho, chum, pink and sockeye salmon as well as steelhead, rainbow and Dolly varden. Eroding banks and extensive riffle zones were evident from the air photos and the likelihood of reduced overall pool area throughout the reach is high. Spawning is probably the primary habitat use in this reach and considering the channel widths and gradients, chinook and chum salmon as well as steelhead would likely be the candidate species capable of utilizing the substrates for that purpose.

The upslope impact potential in this reach should be considered extremely high. Air photos reveal extensive debris torrents associated with the numerous high gradient ephemeral first order tributaries entering this channel from both banks. In several areas torrent paths remain evident above the channel from at least twenty years previous with many large boulders still positioned within the wetted margins of the river.

Reach 8

Fisheries habitat values are rated as low in Reach 8 due in part to the high elevation and the lack of any fisheries information. Further sampling is required to determine species presence and habitat use in this reach. As stated previously, no migration barriers had been observed on the mainstem to this point and therefore fish presence cannot be ruled out. Gradients along this channel average approximately 4% and with the confinement pattern, long stretches of extensive riffle zone punctuated with short cascades are frequent. Little opportunity for rearing or holding exist in this section of the Taleomey River.

The upslope impact potential to fisheries habitat in this reach is also considered low. From the upstream boundary of Reach 7 the valley bottom widens yet the channel itself remains frequently confined. Hillslope and stream channels become decoupled as seen by the numerous mass wastings which tail out along the valley floor outside of the riparian areas. Two areas with multiple channels are seen in this upper reach. Lateral migration of these channels is minimal as the large mid-channel bars support well established woody vegetation with little evidence of recent erosion. Reach 8 ends upstream at a higher gradient cascade sequence leading into the lake basin forming Reach 9.

Reach 9.

No biological data is available for the lake basin comprising this reach. Air photos reveal the lower end of this lake to be ice covered while the upper end is shallow and silt-laden. The outlet to this lake is a steep cascade sequence at an elevation of approximately 660 metres making fish access highly improbable.

2. Tarrant Creek

Tarrant Creek is a major tributary flowing from the south and confluent with Reach 3 of the Taleomey mainstem approximately seven kilometers upstream from the mouth and tidal influence. Nine reaches of Tarrant Creek have been examined from air photos made available for these assessments.

Reach 1

Reach 1 is a short (0.61 km) low gradient (3%) reach which demonstrates some of the best spawning and rearing habitat observed within the Taleomey system. Fish habitat values are considered high in this reach with chum, pink, coho, steelhead, chinook and sockeye included among those spawners observed in this section of Tarrant Creek.

Impact potential has also been assessed as high for this reach. Within the floodplain of the Taleomey mainstem, remnant side-channels may still be vulnerable to infrequent flood events. These channels are confluent with Tarrant Creek from the east and within its prime spawning areas. Spawning beds within this lower portion of Tarrant Creek are therefore at risk of sedimentation and scour in the event of such flooding. Evidence from the 1977 air photo series also indicate a potential scour risk from upstream reaches of Tarrant Creek. Current riparian cover and stable channel conditions, however, indicate that stream discharges have been insufficient over the past two decades to result in such scour or erosion.

Reach 2

Reach 2 has also been assigned a high fisheries value. Although gradients in this reach are double those of the downstream reach (6%), access remains easily achievable and optimal spawning and rearing habitat has been encountered during past reconnaissance surveys. All species observed in Reach 1 have also been recorded in this channel.

Potential upslope impacts are considered high in this reach. Evidence of scour as a result of high volume discharges during 1977 are observed from air photo series from that year. Minor indicators of erosion from the access roads are visible in the recent air photos as well.

 

Reach 3

Fisheries habitat values in this reach are considered low given the available data. The Reach 2 - 3 boundary is formed from a high (10+ metres), impassable falls with channel gradients upstream of this averaging 12% through a predominantly cascade channel morphology. No sampling has been conducted beyond the barrier upstream of Reach 2. Although it is almost certain that fish cannot ascend these falls, the occurrence of resident rainbow trout and Dolly varden should not be dismissed.

Upslope impact potential is minor for Reach 3. Clear cut harvesting adjacent to the upper east end of this reach has not disturbed the riparian forest bordering the channel and no evidence of significant sediment influx is observed. However, minor erosion and siltation from road surfaces are probable during periods of heavy precipitation.

Reach 4

As with Reach 3, this reach demonstrates poor fish habitat values given downstream access constraints, moderate mean gradients and the observed channel type. Riparian buffers have been compromised at various locations through this section of stream and little channel complexity or instream cover is expected.

Extensive clear cut harvesting on both sides of the channel in combination with access road networks through areas of high relief increase the probability of erosion, mass wasting and sedimentation. The potential hazard for upslope impacts to the stream channel is considered moderate to high.

Reach 5

As with downstream reaches, fish habitat values in this reach are considered low for similar reasons. The valley walls above this reach, however, have not been harvested and only minor indicators of past wasting are evident. Impact potential to the stream channel of this reach from upslope sources is considered only low to moderate.

Reach 6, 7, 8, 9

Fisheries habitat values are again considered low for these upper four reaches. Although riparian habitats remain pristine, the straight and confined morphology of this channel offer little opportunity for LWD entering the channel to remain in place and contribute to channel or habitat complexity. Mature conifer stands remain undisturbed above Reach 5 with no major impacts observed. Upslope hazard potential is considered minimal.

Unnamed Tributary (ILP 091)

Reach 1, 2, 3

These reaches are confluent with Reach 7 of Tarrant Creek and form a confined riffle-pool and cascade-pool channel type with gradients ranging between 6 and 13%. The sparse riparian forest typical of mature old growth at these elevations is undisturbed. Fisheries values are considered low here for similar reasons as those of the receiving channel of Tarrant Creek. The upslope impact potential adjacent to these reaches is also considered low and no past impacts, natural or otherwise, to the stream channel are apparent.

3. Km 6 Creek

This stream represents the first of the third order tributaries upstream from the mouth of the Taleomey River. This stream runs for only about four kilometers and demonstrates steep gradients for most of its length.

Reach 1

Due to its confluence with Reach 3 (an important fish habitat channel) of the Taleomey, this reach is also assigned a high fisheries habitat value. Although the mean gradient of this reach is relatively steep at 17%, the lower sections adjacent to the Taleomey are of low gradient and offer rearing and spawning habitat to several of the salmonid species. Silt free water draining the adjacent slopes is particularly attractive to salmon spawners and rearing juveniles seeking refuge from the glacial, silt laden water of the mainstem.

The probabilities for impacts originating from the upslope are rated as low to moderate. Some potential sedimentation and erosion of fine sediments from the adjacent access road and crossing structure are likely during precipitation events.

Reach 2, 3

Gradients within these two reaches run at 31% and 36% respectively and may be considered inaccessible to anadromous and resident salmonids. Habitat values are low for both reaches.

Apart from the forest service road crossing this stream in lower Reach 1, no other development has been undertaken in this minor basin and no observable impacts are evident. Both reaches rate a low upslope impact potential.

4. Km 11 Creek

As with Km 6 Creek, this tributary is relatively short and climbs quickly from the valley bottom. This tributary flows from the southeast and is confluent with the upper portion of Reach 3 of the Taleomey mainstem.

 

Reach 1.

This reach exhibits a mean gradient of 9% over its 230 metre length. The lower portion of this channel, however, demonstrates much lower gradients and supports chinook, coho and steelhead spawners. Debris accumulations near the mouth of this stream also provide excellent cover for rearing juveniles. Habitat values are rated as high.

No significant impacts from upslope processes are evident, however, as past harvesting is evident to the stream bank in this reach, the debris was likely generated from this source. Hazard potentials are otherwise rated as low.

Reach 2

Gradients from the downstream boundary of this reach rise to 25% and effectively restrict fish passage above this point. Cascade channels with very few pools dominate the channel type; habitat value is rated as low.

Exposed soils from timber harvesting at the upstream, higher gradient portions adjacent to this reach may offer a moderate threat of mass wasting and erosion.

Reaches 3 and 4.

High stream gradients (34% and 25% respectively) in combination with poor instream cover make these reaches unlikely habitat for resident salmonids. Both reaches may be rated as having poor habitat value.

Extensive harvesting in proximity to these reaches increase the likelihood of upslope impacts to the stream channel. Reach 3 has seen timber removal from the majority of both banks with little if any riparian vegetation retention. Erosion of fine grained sediments from the access road poses a high potential threat to downstream water quality. Increased volume discharge during periods of precipitation may also lead to bank erosion and failure. Riparian buffer strips have been retained on both margins of Reach 4. Access roads into the cut blocks exhibit bare, highly erodible soils which threaten sedimentation downstream. The hazard potential in this reach rates as moderate to high.

Reaches 5.

Reach 5 of Km 11 Creek received incomplete coverage from the available air photos but those areas which were covered demonstrated a pristine creek with no apparent forest activities (harvesting and roading) indicated. Downstream access and gradients limit the fish habitat value in this reach to poor while the dense, undisturbed forest over apparently stable terrain offer little impact potential.

5. Km. 12 Creek

Reach 1

This creek flows south and drains a small third order basin lying north of the lower section of Reach 5 of the Taleomey mainstem. Available air photos cover only Reach 1 and the lower section of Reach 2. Reach 1 is a short channel of approximately 350 metres with a mean gradient of 1% flowing through an occasionally confined channel with a riffle-pool morphology. Fish habitat values are considered good due to its direct confluence with Reach 5 of Taleomey River and the recorded presence of anadromous spawners from past reconnaissance fisheries studies.

Erosion, sedimentation and mass wasting as observed from the aerial photographs are evident through this reach, particularly upstream of the bridge crossing where the channel bends sharply to the west then south. The removal of a significant fraction of the riparian buffer along the west bank of this reach increases the probability of exacerbating observed impacts. The upslope impact potential in this reach should be considered high.

Reach 2

From the upstream boundary of Reach 1, this channel climbs sharply to an average 9% gradient within a straight, confined channel pattern. Habitat type in this reach is primarily riffle with few pools. Although directly confluent with, and no apparent obstructions between this and Reach 1, habitat value is considered moderate due only to the possibility that Dolly varden utilize this channel.

Upslope impact types are similar to those observed in Reach 1, however, are less pronounced for those areas with air photo coverage. The riparian strip is patchy which may contribute to bank erosion and eventual bank failure leading to mass wasting at a few isolated points on either bank.

6. Km 18 Creek

Reach 1

This tributary of approximately 8 km flows from the south and is confluent with Reach 5 of the Taleomey mainstem. Fish habitat values are considered high in this reach. An abrupt increase in gradient from 14% to 24% marks the upstream boundary of Reach 1. Within Reach 1, particularly in the lower sections, spawning sockeye, chinook, coho, chum and steelhead have been reported.

Potential impacts to the stream channel and fish habitats in Reach 1 are rated as high. The riparian forest remains undisturbed along both banks of this reach only in the lower 150 metres, and moderate to steep gradients may facilitate the transport of sediments entering the channel from upstream sections. Erosion and small mass wasting events associated with the forest road bridge crossing are evident from recent aerial photographs.

Reach 2

Fish habitat values in Reach 2 are considered low due to the steep (24%) gradient and the cascade-pool morphology throughout the reach which likely present migration barriers.

Reach 2 also demonstrates a high potential for upslope impacts to the channel. Here, although the riparian forest is undisturbed by human activity, considerable mass wasting on the west bank has contributed significant sediment loads to the channel. Due to the steeper gradients in this reach only the larger sediments have remained in the wetted channel resulting in aggraded sections and numerous side bars.

The remaining three reaches of Km 18 Creek also exhibit low fish habitat values as gradients remain high (up to 21%) and probable barriers downstream prevent fish access above Reach 1. Several old, small torrent trails testify as to past minor stream impacts, however, the riparian areas appear largely undisturbed in the upper reaches of this tributary. Impact potential from the upslope is rated as low.

7. Km 38 Creek

This large, low gradient, third order tributary flows from the north and is confluent with Taleomey’s Reach 5 marking the upstream reach break. Km 38 Creek constitutes the largest of the Taleomey tributaries. Aerial photography was available only for the lower five kilometers of this stream which covers Reaches 1 to 3.

1. DISCUSSION

This overview fish habitat assessment has been conducted to: determine fish species profiles and distribution limits; assess fish habitat quality within the watershed on a reach by reach basis and to set priorities for determining which reaches may be subject to a more intensive Level 1 fish habitat assessment.

This overview assessment has refined reach break boundaries established previously during fisheries reconnaissance studies of the 1980’s. From this assessment, the historical Reach 5 of Taleomey River has been partitioned into an additional four reaches. The occurrence of specific fish species was recorded for the original Reach 5, however, considering the lack of detailed locational referencing at that time, current fish distribution limits within the upper four reaches of the Taleomey mainstem remain uncertain. Supplemental fish sampling is therefore recommended to establish these reach-specific target fish distributions (Table 2).

1. Fish Inventory and Distribution

Minor gaps in the available data may require addressing in the event that field habitat surveys are considered necessary. As stated above, such gaps include the need for supplemental fish sampling to more accurately define fish distributions where presence is currently unknown or only suspected (Form 1). The reconnaissance fisheries studies conducted during 1984 and 1985 concentrated primarily on the Taleomey mainstem and usually the first reach of its major tributaries. With the occurrence of Dolly varden and Rainbow trout in this watershed, additional effort should be directed at identifying the upstream distribution limits of these species in the event that development plans involve timber harvesting adjacent to reaches currently unclassified.

Table 2. Recommended Supplemental Fish Sampling.

STREAM	LOCATION	COMMENT
Taleomey R	Reaches 6-8	Exact locations of fish observations in these reaches are unknown.
Tarrant Cr.	Reach 3	Falls between Reach 2 and 3 may not preclude resident population in Reach 3 and points upstream.
Km. 12 Cr.	Reach 2	Fish observed in Reach 1 only - no obstructions into Reach 2.
Km. 38 Cr.	Reaches 1, 2, 3	Confluent with fish-bearing reach, low gradients, and appropriate habitats present.

3. Priority Stream Reaches

Notwithstanding the results of further fish sampling trials, priority reaches have been identified based on the product of habitat value and perceived upslope impact potentials (Form 3). A scoring system has been developed for prioritizing stream reaches within this watershed. With this system, values for fish habitat and upslope impact potential were assigned a numerical value of 1, 2, or 3 based on their rating as either low, moderate or high. For those areas where a ranking was transitional between two values such as low-medium (L-M), the numerical ranking was averaged. On the accompanying map products, transitional rankings (Form 3) default to the higher values.

Table 4 illustrates the ranking of assessed reaches within the Watershed. As illustrated in Table 4, the prioritized reaches have been listed in descending order with the most critical reaches ranking the highest. Those reaches with a priority index of ‘9’ are the most critical of assessed channels in this study and have been so assigned due to their high value as target fish habitat while concomitantly demonstrating a high potential for upslope impacts to the stream channel of that reach. Conversely, where perceived fish habitat values are low and are located adjacent to or immediately downstream of areas where hillslope processes are unlikely to impact the channel, priority indices are low.

Should higher level assessments be deemed necessary, consultation between Interfor and the Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and the Ministry of Forests will be required to ascertain which of the reaches identified from these assessments will be given priority. Clearly, there are several highly sensitive reaches within the Watershed which have not been impacted by forest practices. Habitat analysis of these areas in their current pristine condition may be useful in establishing specific habitat diagnostics for silt laden waters. Habitat assessment in reaches adjacent to pending harvest blocks may also facilitate an opportunity to later monitor habitat dynamics during and subsequent to harvest operations. Other sensitive reaches, namely the lower sections of the Taleomey tributaries also receive an annual influx of turbid, silt laden water from the mainstem during the peak summer run-off as a result of snow-melt. These channels should be further assessed in an effort to establish possible prescriptions aimed at limiting the turbid wash from the mainstem, if at least during peak flows.

Several small, ungazetted streams confluent to critical reaches of the Taleomey mainstem demonstrate low gradient channels within the floodplain and may represent crucial habitat during periods of high water. Due to their narrow width and surrounding riparian cover, remote assessments utilizing the available air photo coverage were not possible. Table 3 lists (by Interim Locational Point) those streams which may be subject to Level 1 surveys pending site visits.

Table 3: Priority Unassessed 1st and 2nd Order Tributaries

ILP	UTM	ILP	UTM	ILP	UTM
007	9.662350.5764950	240	9.670630.5765300	299	9.674120.5763770
009	9.662690.5765140	252	9.671460.5764300
019	9.665090.5764330	298	9.673980.5763410

 

4. Proposed Level 1 Assessments

Fourteen of the thirty-four reaches assessed in this overview may be considered priority channels for Level 1 fish habitat assessments (Table 4). These priority reaches have a cumulative length of 38.58 km. Due to their length, macro-reaches such as Taleomey Reach 5 and Reach 2 of Km 12 Creek may require that only representative sections of be surveyed. Those seven unassessed reaches discussed in Section 4.2 will likely require assessment in the field through spot checks once field personnel are on site.

It is recommended that the eight reaches identified in Section 4.1, Table 2, be sampled for fish presence to better determine current fish species distributions within the Taleomey watershed.

1. Preliminary Level 1 Schedule

Sampling of the eight identified reaches for fish presence will utilize one or a combination of electrofisher, G-Traps, or beach seine and will be determined at the time of sampling by local water and weather conditions. A maximum of three days will be required for this task.

Spot checks of the seven unassessed tributary reaches and Level 1 fish habitat surveys of the fourteen priority reaches covering approximately 39 km will likely require no more than 20 to 25 days depending on local road and foot access.

5. Habitat Restoration and Mitigation

Developing prescriptions for the restoration of fish habitat is a detailed process requiring considerable ground work and consultation among biologists, engineers, hydrologists and fluvial geomorphologists. From the perspective of an overview assessment, only non-specific rehabilitative recommendations can be offered. In the case of the Taleomey watershed, sedimentation and erosion appear to be the most prevalent of impacts, irrespective of origin or genesis. It should also be stated that in order to comprehensively assess the health or state of a watershed and certainly prior to initiating any form of restoration or rehabilitation, several specific assessments should be completed. As a compliment to the Taleomey Overview FHAP, sediment source surveys, channel assessments and terrain stability assessments should be conducted as a minimum. As a rule, deleterious processes occurring within the watershed boundaries are eventually evident within the wetted margins of the stream channels. Therefore upslope impacts must be addressed prior to or concurrently with those within the stream channels in order to affect positive intervention.

1. Deflecting structures

Despite naturally high sediment loads associated with mainstem flows, possible solutions may exist to mitigate siltation of sensitive spawning areas situated in the lower portions of tributaries confluent with the mainstem of the Taleomey River.

As reported in previous studies (Holowatiuk et al. 1986), those spawning channels located in the lower sections of tributaries within the Taleomey floodplain are susceptible to siltation from peak flows of the Taleomey. Deflecting weirs or groynes constructed along the upstream facing banks of these tributaries may partially divert silt-laden flood waters away from active salmonid redds. Construction would, by necessity, be site specific but could be fabricated from raw materials such as logs and boulders on site. Placement of such structures would require construction within appropriate work windows, however, minimal instream intrusion could be anticipated.

Table 4. Taleomey Watershed: Prioritized Stream Reaches
Stream	Reach	Habitat	Hazard	Priority
		Value	Index	Index
Taleomey	6	3	3	9
Tarrant Creek	1	3	3	9
Tarrant Creek	2	3	3	9
Km. 12 Creek	1	3	3	9
Km. 18 Creek	1	3	3	9
Km. 38 Creek	1	3	2.5	7.5
Km. 38 Creek	3	3	2.5	7.5
Taleomey	5	3	2.25	6.75
Taleomey	3	3	2	6
Taleomey	7	2	3	6
Km. 6 Creek	1	3	1.5	4.5
Taleomey	2	2	2	4
Km. 38 Creek	2	2	2	4
Km. 12 Creek	2	2	2	4
Taleomey	1	3	1	3
Km. 11 Creek	1	3	1	3
Km. 11 Creek	3	1	3	3
Km. 18 Creek	2	1	3	3
Tarrant Creek	4	1	2.5	2.5
Km. 11 Creek	4	1	2.5	2.5
Taleomey	4	2	1	2
Km. 11 Creek	2	1	2	2
Tarrant Creek	5	1	1.5	1.5
Taleomey	8	1	1	1
Tarrant Creek	3	1	1	1
Tarrant Creek	6	1	1	1
Tarrant Creek	7	1	1	1
Tarrant Creek	8	1	1	1
ILP 061 (Tarrant)	1	1	1	1
ILP 061 (Tarrant)	2	1	1	1
ILP 061 (Tarrant)	3	1	1	1
Km. 6 Creek	2	1	1	1
Km. 6 Creek	3	1	1	1

 

2. LWD Placement

The artificial introduction of large woody debris has long been recognized as a means of increasing cover and adding habitat complexity to stream channels. Given channel morphologies and hydrodynamics of this system, LWD placements may have only limited applications here. From the air photos, very little stable LWD was observed within the bankfull channel of the Taleomey. When considering the extent of the seasonal fluctuation in volume discharge, it would be ill advised to consider introducing any structures in the channel margins. Many of the tributaries reported as optimal rearing areas, however, would likely benefit from the placement of LWD within their banks. Those tributaries which possess reaches comprised primarily of extensive riffle zones would also benefit considerably as a result of the energy dissipation afforded by these structures. LWD also provides instream cover, refuge from predation, and an organic substrate for algae, macroinvertebrates and other food resources utilized by salmonids.

3. Water bars - Sediment traps

Despite the vast volumes of sediment transported through this system, small volumes of silt originating from forest service roads during heavy precipitation may impact sensitive spawning channels within tributary reaches upstream of Taleomey mainstem influence. To minimize the sediment load delivered to streams from road surfaces, frequent water bars can function to divert run-off from road surfaces into the adjacent forest.

On road systems with moderate gradients and inadequate waterbars, run-off traveling long distances in side ditches tend to increase their sediment load with velocity. This water eventually enters the stream network delivering its sediments to the channel. Sediment traps ranging from silt fences to hay bails may function to reduce such introductions.

4. Fish Access Maintenance

Sediments transported downstream will eventually settle and aggrade the lower energy sections of a channel. In extreme situations, aggraded channels may become dewatered and exhibit intermittent or subsurface flows. Peak flows may give rise to moderately aggraded channels where depth is reduced and may prove difficult for migrating fish to successfully negotiate. McGivney et al., 1985 reported that the lower sections of Tarrant Creek were being over utilized by salmonid spawners. This may, in part, have been a result of certain areas further upstream being inaccessible due to aggraded channels. Instream work conducted (inside appropriate windows) to ensure adequate depth and passage for spawners may be a simple and effective means of maintaining a fisheries resource in such river systems.

3. References

Abbott, J.C., G.O. Stewart and P.R. Murray. 1986. South Bentinck Arm Adult Salmonid Reconnaissance Program, 1985. DSS Contract No. 01SB.FP501-0101.

Burroughs, Edward R. and John G. King. 1989. Reduction of soil erosion on forest roads. General Technical Report INT-264. Ogden, UT: U.S.F.S. Intermountain Research Station.

Channel Assessment Procedure Guidebook, 1997. Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 7, Watershed Restoration Program: Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and Ministry of Forests

Holowatiuk, G.J., G.O. Stewart and P.R. Murray. 1986. South Bentinck Arm Juvenile Salmonid Reconnaissance Program, 1985. DSS Contract No. 01SB.FP501-0101.

Slaney, P. A. and N. T. Johnston, 1996. Fish Habitat Assessment Procedures; Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 8. Watershed Restoration Program: Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks and Ministry of Forests.

McGivney, K.K., G.J. Holowatiuk and P.R. Murray. 1985. South Bentinck Arm Adult Salmonid Reconnaissance Program. DSS Contract No. 03SB.FP576-4-0920.

Montgomery, D. R. and J. M. Buffington. 1993. Channel classification, prediction of channel response, and assessment of channel condition. 1993. TFW-SH10-93-002. Timber Fish & Wildlife, Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. 84 plus figures.

Nakamura, F. and F.J. Swanson, 1992. Effects of Course Woody Debris on Morphology and Sediment Storage of a Mountain Stream System in Western Oregon. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, Vol. 18, 43-61.

Oikos Ecol. Ser. and T. Johnson Assoc. June 1996. Draft #3A: Riparian assessment and prescription procedures: Watershed Restoration Program: Field guide. Smithers: Oikos and Johnson.

Riparian Management Area Guidebook, Forest Practices Code of British Columbia, December 1995. Victoria: Ministry of Forests and B.C. Environment.

Scott, W. B. and E. J. Crossman, 1973. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Fish. Res. Bd. Of Canada Bull. 184, 966p.

Smith, R. D., R.C. Sidle and P. E. Porter, 1993. Effects of Bedload Transport of Experimental Removal of Woody Debris From a Forest Gravel-Bed Stream. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, Vol. 18, 455-468.

Standards for Fish and Fish Habitat Mapping, 1997. Resource Inventory Committee. Fisheries Section, Resource Inventory Branch.