OWA BMP Sturgeon Report 09

Ontario Waterpower Association
Best Management Practices Guide for Waterpower Projects

June, 2009
Lake Sturgeon
A Report Prepared by AECOM Canada Ltd.
July 1, 2009
Project Number: 108256-90113
Mr. Paul Norris Ontario Waterpower Association #210-380 Armour Road Peterborough, ON K9H 7L7 Dear Mr. Norris: Re: Lake Sturgeon Best Management Practices Guide We are pleased to provide you with the Final Version of the Lake Sturgeon Best Management Practices Guide for Hydropower Projects. As stated in the initial DRAFT, the development of this Best Management Practices (BMP) Guide reflects a synthesis of industry-wide knowledge and best available science regarding hydropower impacts on the Lake Sturgeon resource in Ontario. Furthermore, it provides management strategies to avoid, mitigate and/or minimize those impacts. The goal of this BMP Document is to provide proponents and practitioners with tools and approaches based on the best available science to minimize potential impacts on Lake Sturgeon and create some coherence and predictability to otherwise complex project types. Sincerely, AECOM Canada Ltd.
Daniel P. Gibson, B.Sc. Dan.Gibson@aecom.com DG:mm Encl.
Best Management Practices Guide
Lake Sturgeon
Table of Contents
1.0
Introduction .................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Ontarios Waterpower Resources ...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Similarities among Project Types ..................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Differences among Project Types ..................................................................................................... 6 1.4 Purpose and Rationale for the Best Management Practices for Lake Sturgeon.............................. 6 1.5 Goals of the Best Management Practices Guide for Lake Sturgeon ................................................ 8 Framework of Best Management Practices Guide .........................................................9 2.1 Best Management Practices Conceptual Process .......................................................................... 9 2.2 Project Screening Overview Planning Process .............................................................................. 9 2.3 Impact Identification Pathways of Effect .................................................................................... 12 Potentially Applicable Legislation .....................................................................................13 3.1 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act........................................................................................... 13 3.2 Fisheries Act ...................................................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Species at Risk Act (Canada) ............................................................................................................ 15 3.4 Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act..................................................................................................... 17 3.5 Endangered Species Act (Ontario) .................................................................................................... 17 3.6 Conservation Authorities Act .............................................................................................................. 18 3.7 Ontario Water Resources Act (Ministry of the Environment).......................................................... 19 History and Ecology of the Lake Sturgeon ..................................................................... 21 4.1 Distribution ..................................................................................................................................... 22 4.2 Biology ............................................................................................................................................ 22 4.3 Life History Hydrograph ................................................................................................................. 24 Lake Sturgeon and Dams ......................................................................................................27
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0 Impact Identification ..............................................................................................................29 6.1 Encroachment Project Footprint ................................................................................................. 29 6.1.1 Impact Identification ........................................................................................................... 29 6.2 Generation ....................................................................................................................................... 31 6.2.1 Impact Identification .......................................................................................................... 31 6.3 Operational Storage ........................................................................................................................ 33 6.3.1 Impact Identification .......................................................................................................... 33 6.4 Spill ................................................................................................................................................. 36 6.4.1 Impact Identification .......................................................................................................... 36
Lake Sturgeon
iii
7.0
Best Management Practices .................................................................................................39 7.1 M1 Management of Recreational Fishing Pressure/Sanctuaries ................................................ 39 7.2 M2 Public Education of Fishing Regulations ............................................................................. 44 7.3 M3 Minimize Public Access and Alternative Navigation ........................................................... 44 7.4 M4 First Nations Consultation ................................................................................................... 45 7.5 M5 Water Level Management in Reservoirs ................................................................................ 46 7.6 M6 Water Management Plans (existing facilities) and Dam Operating Plans (new facilities) 47 7.6.1 Incorporating the BMP for Lake Sturgeon into Water Management Plans ....................... 49 7.7 M7 Provision of Sturgeon Passage .............................................................................................. 50 7.8 M8 Relocation of Lake Sturgeon ................................................................................................. 52 7.9 M9 Barriers to Upstream Migration into Spillway ..................................................................... 53 7.10 M10 Alternative Turbine Designs ................................................................................................ 53 7.11 M11 Provision of Fish Protection Measures for Entrainment ................................................... 54 7.12 M12 Existing DFO Pathways of Effect and Operational Statements......................................... 55 7.13 M13 Natural Channel Design Principles ..................................................................................... 57 7.14 M14 Enhanced Channel Stabilization Techniques .................................................................... 57 7.15 M15 Fisheries Management Plans .............................................................................................. 57 7.16 M16 Design/Re-design of Outlet Structures ............................................................................... 58 7.17 M17 Mercury Accumulation (Bioconcentration) Control Measure.......................................... 58 7.18 C1 Stock Specific Hatchery Programs ......................................................................................... 59 7.19 C2 Habitat Creation and Enhancement Programs .................................................................... 60
8.0 Cumulative Effects/Impacts for Proposed and Modified Facilities.......................65 9.0 Feasibility of Implementation .............................................................................................67
10.0 Retrospective .............................................................................................................................69 11.0 References .................................................................................................................................. 71 12.0 Glossary .......................................................................................................................................79
iv
List of Figures Figure 1A&B. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. Figure 7. Figure 8. Figure 9. Figure 10. Figure 11. Figure 12. Figure 13. Figure 14. Lake Sturgeon Distribution and Water Power Generating Stations / Potential Stations ..........2/3 Overview of Waterpower Facility .................................................................................................... 5 Best Management Practices Conceptual Process ...................................................................... 10 Project Screening Overview............................................................................................................11 DFO Risk Management Framework Matrix.................................................................................. 14 Typical Hydrograph for a Generic Regulated and Unregulated River with Key Lake Sturgeon Life History Details Superimposed ............................................................... 25 Encroachment Project Footprint Pathways of Effect ................................................................ 30 Generation Pathways of Effect ...................................................................................................... 32 Storage Pathways of Effect ............................................................................................................. 34 Spill Pathways of Effect ................................................................................................................. 37 Modified Encroachment Project Footprint Pathways of Effect ............................................. 40 Modified Generation Pathways of Effect ...................................................................................... 41 Modified Storage Pathways of Effect ............................................................................................ 42 Modified Spill Pathways of Effect ................................................................................................. 43
List of Tables Table 1. Table 2. Lake Sturgeon Designatable Units in Canada ............................................................................... 22 Relative Costs of Implementing BMPs during Planning, Avoidance and Redesign Phases of Projects Greenfield and Existing Upgrade Developments ......................... 67
Appendices A. B. C. Fisheries and Oceans Pathways of Effect Diagrams Fisheries and Oceans Standard Operational Statements Lake Sturgeon Literature Review
Lake Sturgeon
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Ontarios Waterpower Resources Ontarios water resources are an integral part of the Provinces environmental, social, cultural and economic fabric, and are vital to meeting the renewable energy requirements of the Province through waterpower. With over 250,000 lakes and tens of thousands of kilometres of rivers and streams, the watersheds contained within the Great Lakes, Hudson Bay and the St. Lawrence regions dominate the geography of the Province. The drainage patterns, topography and geology of these watersheds lead to the consideration of these resources for waterpower development. Waterpower generation is a proven source for renewable and secure energy at both the regional and provincial scale. It is the most efficient method of energy conversion and is the most versatile in responding to changes in electricity demand. Historically (up to the 1950s), waterpower provided almost all of the provinces energy requirements and dates back more than a century in Canadian history. Over the past half century, other forms of energy generation such as fossil and nuclear power have received more focus due to the perceptions that waterpower opportunities within Ontario no longer exist. These perceptions however, are not accurate (OWA, 2005) and as demand for electricity increases, many waterpower sites previously deemed as impractical or uneconomic are becoming more feasible. Today, the need for renewable energy is greater than ever as the provincial government aims to double the amount of electricity generated by renewable sources by 2025 while drastically reducing its dependence on coal generation (Ontario Power Authority, 2006). Currently, there are almost 200 operating waterpower facilities in Ontario that, collectively, account for approximately one-quarter of the Provinces installed capacity (8,000 Megawatts [MW]) and electricity generation (35-38 Terawatt hours (TWh) annually (OWA, 2008). Facilities in the province range in size from less than 100 kilowatts (kW) to more than 1,000 MW.
The increased demand for renewable energy however, comes with many challenges. Harmonizing energy production to meet the needs of the province while maintaining a legacy for future generations is the responsibility of both industry and resource managers. One such challenge that currently exists is to evaluate and plan for the sustainability of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in relation to current and future development of waterpower in Ontario. To date, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Species in Canada (COSEWIC) has separated the populations of Lake Sturgeon into four designatable units within Ontario. Further to this, these populations are being considered for listing under the provisions of the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) as follows (Figure 1A and 1B): The Winnipeg, English River (DU5) population currently listed as Endangered; The Lake of the Woods, Rainy River (DU6) population currently listed as Special Concern; The Southern Hudson Bay, James Bay (DU7) population currently listed as Special Concern; and, The Great Lakes, Western St. Lawrence (DU8) population currently listed as Threatened.
COSEWIC is an independent group of scientists from various communities throughout Canada including universities, government agencies and First Nations groups. They are tasked with 1) the selection and prioritization of species requiring assessment in the form of a candidate list and priority list, 2) the compilation of available data, knowledge and information in the form of status reports; and 3) the assessment of a species risk of extinction or extirpation and subsequent status designation.
Lake Sturgeon
Hudson Bay
Figure 1A. Lake Sturgeon Distribution and Water Power Generating Stations
James Bay
Lake Superior
na U . da S.A .
Ca
n L M ke a a ag h ic
Lake Huron
Lake Ontario
(DU7) (DU5) (DU6)
e ak
ie Er
(DU8)
Basemapping from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Data from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Atlas for Lake Sturgeon Waters in Ontario 2002.
Legend Water Power Generating Station Watershed with Lake Sturgeon

Lake Sturgeon Distribution and Designation in Ontario
DFO Designation Units

Kilometers 0 32.5 65 130 195 1:6,500,000 UTM Zone 17N, NAD 83 260
Great Lakes, Western St. Lawrence (DU8) Lake of the Woods, Rainy River (DU6) Southern Hudson Bay, James Bay (DU7) Winnipeg, English Rivers (DU5) Province/State Boundary Canada-U.S.A. Border
Map Document: (N:\Projects\2009\90113\2009\Final\GISSpatial\MXDs\WorkingMXDs\90113LakeSturgeonDistribution.mxd) 3/3/2009 -- 9:38:16 AM
Lake Sturgeon Distribution and Water Power Generating Stations

March 2009 Project 90113
Best Management Practices Guide Lake Sturgeon 2
2009 AECOM Canada Ltd. All Rights Reserved. This document is protected by copyright law and may not be used, reproduced or modified in any manner or for any purpose except with the written permission of AECOM Canada Ltd. ("AECOM") or a party to which its copyright has been assigned. AECOM accepts no responsibility, and denies any liability whatsoever, to any party that uses, reproduces, modifies, or relies on this document without AECOMs express written consent.
Figure 1
Figure 1B.
Hudson Bay
Potential Stations
James Bay
Lake Sturgeon Distribution and Water Power Generating Stations/
Lake Superior
na U . da S.A .
Ca
L M
n ke a a ag h ic
Lake Huron
Lake Ontario
(DU7) (DU5) (DU6)
e ak
ie Er
(DU8)
Basemapping from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Data from Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Atlas for Lake Sturgeon Waters in Ontario 2002.
Legend Potential Generating Station Watershed with Lake Sturgeon

Lake Sturgeon Distribution and Designation in Ontario
DFO Designation Units

Kilometers 0 32.5 65 130 195 1:6,500,000 UTM Zone 17N, NAD 83 260
Great Lakes, Western St. Lawrence (DU8) Lake of the Woods, Rainy River (DU6) Southern Hudson Bay, James Bay (DU7) Winnipeg, English Rivers (DU5) Province/State Boundary Canada-U.S.A. Border
Map Document: (N:\Projects\2009\90113\2009\Final\GISSpatial\MXDs\WorkingMXDs\90113LakeSturgeonDistributionPotentialSites.mxd) 3/3/2009 -- 9:45:45 AM
Lake Sturgeon Distribution and Potential Power Generating Stations

March 2009 Project 90113
Best Management Practices Guide Lake Sturgeon 3
2009 AECOM Canada Ltd. All Rights Reserved. This document is protected by copyright law and may not be used, reproduced or modified in any manner or for any purpose except with the written permission of AECOM Canada Ltd. ("AECOM") or a party to which its copyright has been assigned. AECOM accepts no responsibility, and denies any liability whatsoever, to any party that uses, reproduces, modifies, or relies on this document without AECOMs express written consent.
Figure 2
Further to the potential SARA designations, the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO) is currently reviewing the status of Lake Sturgeon under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Based on these reviews and potential designations, the development of a Best Management Practices (BMP) Guide for Waterpower Development and Operation affecting Lake Sturgeon provides the Ontario Waterpower Association (OWA) and its members with a toolbox of steps to mitigate and monitor potential effects that existing and future waterpower facilities may have on Lake Sturgeon. The BMP for Waterpower Development and Operation affecting Lake Sturgeon is therefore a proactive undertaking by the OWA and consists of: a) a literature review focused on impacts of waterpower facilities on Lake Sturgeon; b) a review of existing legislation that is applicable to Lake Sturgeon and the implications for existing and new waterpower development in Ontario; c) a review of potential impacts of waterpower facilities on Lake Sturgeon; d) a review of current waterpower industry practices that mitigate the effects on Lake Sturgeon; and e) a summary of Best Management Practices and Pathways of Effect Diagrams focused on avoidance, mitigation and compensation/ offsetting measures for minimizing impacts on Lake Sturgeon.
The development of this BMP Guide reflects a synthesis of the best available science to date and industry-wide knowledge and furthers the OWAs approach to providing the best available information to its members. The guide is intended to serve as a practical, useable resource for practitioners and furthers the OWAs commitment to foster and maintain positive and productive relationships with those with an interest in waterpower. In a separate initiative, the OWA has also worked directly with government agencies in the development of the Federal Requirements for Waterpower Development Environmental Assessment Processes in Ontario Practitioners Guide (2006). The development of this BMP Guide builds on that product, in particular through the application of the DFO Risk Management Framework and a Pathways of Effect approach. It is important to note however, that BMP practices are ever-evolving and as such, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Fisheries and Oceans Canada should be contacted early in the design and planning process to ensure that proposed BMPs are consistent with current legislation, policies, and fisheries management plans, goals and objectives.
1.2 Similarities among Project Types Most waterpower facilities, regardless of type, use similar technology for energy generation and utilize the natural drop or head of the river and/or build a dam to raise the water level and provide the drop needed to create a driving force. Water at the higher level (the reservoir) goes through the intake into a canal or a pipe called a penstock, which carries it down to the turbine. The turbine is connected to a generator. When the turbine is set in motion, it causes the generator to rotate and electricity is produced. The falling water then exits the generating station through the draft tube into the tailrace (river). Figure 2 depicts this process and some of the above mentioned components. Waterpower development and re-development has taken place in Ontario for well over a century and the basis for the production of electric energy from falling water has not changed fundamentally over time. The province has gone through a number of waterpower or hydro eras, most recently from the mid-1980s to the early 1990s. Notwithstanding that waterpower is considered a relatively mature means of producing electricity, advancements in technology, efficiency; water resource management and environmental mitigation continue to be made. The approach taken in this BMP Guide is that all waterpower projects, regardless of size or type, new or existing, have the potential to affect Lake Sturgeon and their habitat through four inherent functions/activities; 1) Encroachment Project Footprint, 2) Generation, 3) Storage and, 4) Spill.
Figure 2. Overview of Waterpower Facility
(Courtesy: www.window.state.tx.us/specialrpt/energy/renewable/images/exhibit19-1.png, March, 2008)
Lake Sturgeon
This document recognizes that potential effects on the environment are a function of both the nature of the project as well as the conditions and characteristics of the natural environment within which a project is proposed. This broader context provides the most useful means of identifying the generic similarities among projects.
1.4 Purpose and Rationale for the Best Management Practices for Lake Sturgeon The purpose of the Lake Sturgeon BMP is to provide a toolbox of common approaches and guidance to proponents and practitioners regarding Lake Sturgeon based on best available science. Through this, the BMPs should aid in streamlining the review and approval requirements related to impacts on Lake Sturgeon under: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The federal Fisheries Act, The federal Species at Risk Act, The Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act, The provincial Endangered Species Act (if applicable), and, The Green Energy Act 1
1.3 Differences among Project Types The Best Management Practices described in this guide are applicable to projects that range from modification of existing infrastructure (e.g., retrofits and expansions) to new facilities where none existed before. In addition, projects may also occur in different environmental settings characterized by managed or unmanaged river systems. Key considerations include: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) the general natural environment; fish community composition; aquatic and riparian ecosystems; cultural heritage resources; social and economic features; community and public interest; land and resource use; and aboriginal interests.
This BMP Guide recognizes these differences among project proposals and concedes that detailed aspects within individual projects may not be outlined in detail. This BMP Guide however, does present enough detail to ensure that the general characteristics of each project can be appropriately addressed.
Furthermore, the BMP Guide can also serve as a resource for owners and operators of existing waterpower facilities. The BMP Guide has been produced to allow proponents and practitioners greater ability to continue to act as good stewards of the environment. The information presented within this document will aid in ensuring existing and proposed waterpower facilities in Ontario will satisfy the current and proposed legislation, regulations, and policies. The BMP Guide is intended to have provincial context but could be applied to other regions or provinces of Canada as the format of this document is intended to work in conjunction with existing Fisheries and Oceans Pathways of Effect Diagrams (Appendix A) and Fisheries and Oceans Operational Statements (Appendix B).
To review, the rationale for the development of the Best Management Practices Guide specifically targeted toward Lake Sturgeon therefore includes: 1. The provincial governments desired acceleration of new renewable energy projects, as represented by the introduction of the Green Energy Act COSEWICs distinct designatable units and potential listings under the federal Species at Risk Act, the provincial governments (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources) current review of the status of Lake Sturgeon under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act and, the potential impacts that waterpower may have on Lake Sturgeon.
The BMP Guide is intended as a reference guide for project proponents and practitioners. This document purposely avoids in-depth discussions of individual project types and historic practices as the degree of variance in size, scale, operation type and generation type are far too diverse to be undertaken in a single document. Rather, this BMP Guide focuses on: 1. 2. general avoidance measures through planning, design, construction and operation, mitigation measures through the design, construction and operation processes of new and existing facilities, mitigation and conceptual compensation/ offsetting measures based on industry practices and best available science.
2.
3.
3.
4.
1.5 Goals of the Best Management Practices Guide for Lake Sturgeon As outlined above, this BMP Guide builds on key concepts applied under the federal Fisheries Act, in particular through the application of the DFO Risk Management Framework and a Pathways of Effect approach. To this end the goal of this BMP Guide is to provide proponents and practitioners with tools and approaches based on the best available science to minimize potential impacts on Lake Sturgeon and create some coherence and predictability to otherwise complex project types. These tools and approaches are intended to strengthen rationale when demonstrating low/no scale of negative effects justification under any the above noted Acts. The Guide also provides proponents with the ability to make informed decisions early in the project planning and design phases to minimize the risk to Lake Sturgeon and their habitat.
It is important to note that the use of the BMP Guide does not guarantee the approval of a proposed waterpower project with regulatory agencies (RAs) (i.e., DFO, OMNR). Each project, and project review, is a site specific undertaking and the assessment of impacts from a fish and fish habitat perspective can be complex and dependent on multiple factors. In all cases however, this BMP Guide is intended to provide best available advice in addressing waterpower projects and Lake Sturgeon.
Lake Sturgeon
2.0 Framework of Best Management Practices Guide
2.1 Best Management Practices Conceptual Process The format in which the BMP Guide is implemented is presented in Figure 3. This overview illustrates the decision tree matrix for streamlining and effectively minimizing impacts to Lake Sturgeon from the planning phase through to the monitoring of a waterpower facility. Figure 3 is intended to act as a high level tool illustrating the framework in which avoidance, re-design, mitigation and compensation/offsetting measures can be implemented and shows appropriate activities throughout the process. This framework follows a similar hierarchical approach to that of the DFO Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat in Canada (Department of Fisheries and Oceans, 1986). The objective of that Policy is a net gain of habitat for Canadas Fisheries Resources, which is achieved through the goals of fish habitat conservation, restoration and development (enhancement). According to the policy, regulators work with the proponent to eliminate/reduce the impacts of the proposed project through the use of a hierarchal framework of measures including: a) relocate or physically move a project or part of a project to eliminate potential impacts on fish and fish habitat; b) redesign a project so that it no longer results in potential impacts to fish or fish habitat; c) mitigation to alleviate potential adverse effects on the productive capacity of fish habitat and is typically used when relocation or redesign are not possible; and d) compensation or offsetting measures should only be considered when relocating and/or redesign prove impractical and where mitigation measures fail to avoid all impacts on fish and fish habitat.
2.2
Project Screening Overview Planning Process
In practice, avoidance, redesign and mitigation are frequently used in combination to minimize or avoid impacts to fisheries resources. For new developments, this process begins within the planning phase of the project and first focuses on avoidance strategies. Figure 4 outlines a conceptual planning process for gaining a detailed understanding of the fisheries resource within the project study area and concludes with a selection of a preferred site location. The process commences with an initial assessment of anticipated impacts to Lake Sturgeon habitat based on a series of criteria to be addressed at the planning stage of a project. Namely, these criteria include: 1. 2. 3. 4. an assessment of sturgeon presence/absence within a project study area; the connectivity of the habitat (upstream and downstream) within a project study area; the importance of the habitat (both spatial and temporal) to Lake Sturgeon; and the habitat contribution to Canadian Fisheries within a landscape/watershed.
Lake Sturgeon
Figure 3. Best Management Practices Conceptual Process
10
Figure 4. Project Screening Overview
Lake Sturgeon
11
In order to properly assess the potential impacts on Lake Sturgeon with some degree of confidence in the planning stage, a baseline conditions study of the Lake Sturgeon community and habitat potentially affected should be conducted through consultation with regulatory agencies (i.e., DFO, MNR). Considerate of existing resources and information, a scoped baseline conditions study may prove valuable in effectively undertaking an evaluation of site alternatives prior to the selection of the preferred site. To this end, the planning exercise and baseline condition determination is a primary avoidance tool in minimizing not only project impacts in relation to Lake Sturgeon and their habitat but also to avoid cumulative impacts to the species on a landscape scale. Whether it is a regulatory agency undertaking, or a proponent driven undertaking, the strategic avoidance of critical habitat and the concentration of projects within non-critical habitat on a landscape scale is of fundamental importance during the planning phase of a project.
to further mitigate/eliminate the potential impacts on Lake Sturgeon and their habitat. Through industry knowledge and best available science, the potential impacts from waterpower facilities on Lake Sturgeon are summarized into four activities for the purposes of the BMP Guide. The categories include impacts associated with both the construction and long term operation of a waterpower facility as presented in Section 6. The four categories are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. Encroachment Project Footprint Generation of Energy Storage of Water Spilling of Water
2.3
Impact Identification Pathways of Effect
Pathways of Effect (POE) are an approach used by some RAs (i.e., DFO, MNR) to determine possible causeand-effect relationships between in-water or near water activities and the aquatic environment. At the early stages of project design, all activities that have the potential to affect fish and fish habitat in a negative way are identified, and methods for eliminating or mitigating each of the pathways are evaluated. By following this approach, a clear understanding of potential aquatic impacts can be demonstrated up-front, and an assessment of residual risk can be done. Similar to regulatory agency use, the POE diagrams established for the purposes of this BMP Guide (Section 6) follow cause-and-effect principles. Unlike the aforementioned POE however, in addition to methods for avoiding, eliminating or mitigating each of the pathways, the BMP Guide also incorporates compensation/offsetting strategies that may be employed
For each of the four categories, two POE diagrams were developed. The first POE illustrates the cause and effect relationships ultimately leading to a change in the productive capacity of the Lake Sturgeon resource (Figures 7 to 10). The second POE illustrates the various Best Management Practices (Section 7) introduced at various stages of a project (pre-construction to production) to effectively break the links or minimize the potential impacts on Lake Sturgeon through means of avoiding, re-designing, mitigating or compensating/ offsetting measures (Figures 11 to 14). These links therefore, play an important role in the project resulting in a low/no scale of negative effect and aids in satisfying the various Acts and Legislation that are applicable most waterpower projects. To this end, the following section summarizes many of the applicable Acts and Legislation pertaining to Lake Sturgeon and waterpower projects/ development.
12
3.0
Potentially Applicable Legislation

3.2 Fisheries Act In addition to reviewing projects under SARA (Section 3.3) and CEAA (Section 3.1) in Canada, the DFOs Ontario-Great Lakes Area, Fish Habitat Management Program has the mandate for administering the habitat protection provisions of the Fisheries Act. The federal Fisheries Act provides for the protection of fish habitat, which is defined as: spawning grounds and nursery, rearing, food supply and migration areas on which fish depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life processes. Under the Fisheries Act, no one may carry out any work or undertaking that results in the harmful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) of fish habitat, unless this HADD has been authorized by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. An authorization under Section 35(2) of the Fisheries Act is a regulatory trigger under the CEA Act. The following sections of the Fisheries Act are of particular importance to waterpower projects in the context of the planning process for a new project or in the operation of an existing facility:
Section 35: The prohibition against the harmful
3.1 Canadian Environmental Assessment Act1 The Canadian Environmental Assessment (CEA) Act is a federal law that is triggered when the federal government is the proponent, provides financial assistance, owns or administers federal lands or is issuing a permit or approval in order to enable a project in whole or in part to proceed. The purpose of the legislation is to ensure that the effects of projects are considered before irrevocable decisions are made by federal authorities. The CEA Act requires responsible authorities (RAs) to consider the effects of proposed projects prior to taking an action that would enable a project to proceed. In order for the CEA Act to apply, there must be: a) b) c) a federal authority; a subsection 5(1) trigger (i.e., a federal power, duty or function in respect of the project); and a project that is not excluded.
Due to the potential need for a Fisheries Act authorization, it is expected that the CEA Act will apply to many waterpower projects. Federal-provincial initiatives to harmonize regulatory requirements are intended to allow flexibility to address the specific requirements and responsibilities of the federal responsible authorities while at the same time increasing the predictability of the process. This will allow RAs to rely upon the information collected under the provincial process to help meet their obligations under the CEA Act and create a more consistent, streamlined and predictable process for proponents.
alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat, unless authorized by DFO;

Section 20:
Passage of fish around migration barriers;
Section 22: The provision of sufficient water flows; Section 30: Screening of water intakes; Section 32: Prohibition against the destruction of
fish by means other than fishing, unless authorized by DFO; and

Section 36: Prohibition to deposit deleterious
substances except by regulation (administered by Environment Canada, with the exception of subsection 36(3) with respect to sediment).
Lake Sturgeon
13
As part of the federal governments commitment to modernize and streamline the regulatory approvals process, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) developed the Environmental Process Modernization Plan (EPMP). A key element of the EPMP is the Risk Management Framework (RMF) (Figure 5). The Risk Management Framework Matrix (RMFM) is designed to evaluate the relative risk associated with the residual effects of a project, identified using the Pathways of Effect approach outlined above. The RMF assesses the severity of the residual effects in combination with the sensitivity of the fish and fish habitat at the site. The relative risk is categorized as low,
medium, or high, representing an increasing scale of anticipated negative effects. Projects identified as low risk are typically managed using tools such as Operational Statements, best management practices, fact sheets, letters of advice and other such guidelines. Medium risk projects may be managed with Class Authorizations. Projects in the high risk category are usually managed through individual harmful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) of fish habitat authorizations but can be advanced through and assisted by Best Management Practices and other established guidelines, such as this BMP.
Figure 5. DFO Risk Management Framework Matrix
The presence of rare, endangered or species at risk requires a project to demonstrate low/no negative effect on the species present for DFO to obtain a Fisheries Act Authorization
The presence of rare, endangered or species at risk requires a project to demonstrate low/no negative effect on the species present for DFO to obtain a Fisheries Act Authorization
14
In the case of rare or endangered species, these projects are generally grouped within the highly sensitive column within the Risk Management Matrix (Figure 5). In these situations it is the proponents responsibility to demonstrate to RAs that the scale of negative effect for the project has relatively low/no impact on fish or fish habitat. Failure to demonstrate this low/no scale of negative effect may result in the project being deemed an unacceptable risk to fish and fish habitat. This guide provides various mitigation and management strategies that could be considered to lessen the scale of potential negative effects. Furthermore, in Ontario, in an effort to create a one window approach, DFO has negotiated agreements with all 36 Conservation Authorities to review development plans for their impacts to fish habitat pursuant to Section 35 of the Fisheries Act. Levels of the Agreement include:
Level I:
Level III: In addition to all of the above, the
Conservation Authority works with the proponent and DFO to prepare a fish habitat compensation plan. The project is then forwarded to the local DFO office for authorization under the Fisheries Act. DFO also has partnering agreements with Parks Canada. In the event that a project requires an authorization under the Fisheries Act, it is only DFO that can provide the authorization. Additional information regarding the requirements for an Application for Authorization for Works or Undertakings Affecting Fish Habitat is available through the OWA and from DFO.
3.3 Species at Risk Act (Canada) 1 The purposes of the Species at Risk Act (SARA) is to:
The local Conservation Authority conducts the initial review of the project to identify any impacts to fish and fish habitat. If there are potential impacts to fish and fish habitat, the project is forwarded to the local DFO office for further review. In addition to the above, the Conservation Authority determines how the proponent can mitigate any potential impacts to fish and fish habitat. If impacts to fish and fish habitat can be mitigated, then the Conservation Authority issues a letter of advice. If impacts to fish and fish habitat cannot be fully mitigated, the project is forwarded to the local DFO office for further review.
a)
Level II:
prevent Canadian indigenous species, subspecies, and distinct populations from being Extirpated or becoming Extinct; b) provide for the recovery of wildlife species that are Extirpated, Endangered or Threatened as a result of human activity; and c) manage species of special concern to prevent them from becoming Endangered or Threatened. Two federal Ministers are responsible for the administration of SARA. The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada is responsible for aquatic species at risk and the Minister of Environment (through the Parks Canada Agency) is responsible for species at risk found in national parks, national historic sites or other protected heritage areas. The Minister of the Environment is also responsible for all other species at risk, and for the administration of the Act. The federal Species at Risk Act gives these Ministers the authority to make decisions in their areas of responsibility. In particular, the following
Lake Sturgeon
15
requirements of SARA are of potential importance during the planning process as it relates to the protection of Lake Sturgeon:
Section 32:
(1) No person shall kill, harm, harass, capture or take an individual of a wildlife species that is listed as an extirpated species, an endangered species or a threatened species. (2) No person shall possess, collect, buy, sell or trade an individual of a wildlife species that is listed as an extirpated species, an endangered species or a threatened species, or any part or derivative of such an individual. (3) For the purposes of subsection (2), any animal, plant or thing that is represented to be an individual, or a part or derivative of an individual, of a wildlife species that is listed as an extirpated species, an endangered species or a threatened species is deemed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to be such an individual or a part or derivative of such an individual.
Section 33:
recommended the reintroduction of the species into the wild in Canada if (a) the critical habitat is on federal land, in the exclusive economic zone of Canada or on the continental shelf of Canada; (b) the listed species is an aquatic species; or (c) the listed species is a species of migratory birds protected by the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994.
Section 79 (1):
Every person who is required by or under an Act of Parliament to ensure that an assessment of the environmental effects of a project is conducted must, without delay, notify the competent minister or ministers in writing of the project if it is likely to affect a listed wildlife species or its critical habitat.
Section 79 (2):
The person must identify the adverse effects of the project on the listed wildlife species and its critical habitat and, if the project is carried out, must ensure that measures are taken to avoid or lessen those effects and to monitor them. The measures must be taken in a way that is consistent with any applicable recovery strategy and action plans. Under the provisions of the Fisheries Act, any waterpower projects on systems where Lake Sturgeon exist will be categorized as projects where rare or endangered species exist within the DFO Risk Matrix. These projects will therefore be subject to greater scrutiny during regulatory review (Figure 5). In these situations it is the proponents responsibility to demonstrate to regulators that the scale of negative effect for the project has relatively low/no impact on sturgeon or sturgeon habitat or the project may be deemed non-permissible by regulators.
No person shall damage or destroy the residence of one or more individuals of a wildlife species that is listed as an endangered species or a threatened species, or that is listed as an extirpated species if a recovery strategy has recommended the reintroduction of the species into the wild in Canada.
Section 58 (1):
Subject to this section, no person shall destroy any part of the critical habitat of any listed endangered species or of any listed threatened species or of any listed extirpated species if a recovery strategy has
16
3.4 Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act1 The Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act (LRIA) is an important piece of legislation of direct relevance to almost all waterpower facilities. Dams, diversions, works in water and improvements thereto are the key focus of the Act. The MNR administers the Act, and as such is the lead ministry for regulating siting, construction, operation and maintenance of dams. The LRIA has broad purposes, as set out in Section 2 of the LRIA, including the: a) management, protection, preservation and use of the water of Ontarios lakes and rivers and the land under them; b) protection and equitable exercise of public rights in or over the waters of the lakes and rivers of Ontario; c) protection of the interests of riparian owners; d) management, perpetuation and use of the fish, wildlife and other natural resources dependent on the lakes and rivers; e) protection of the natural amenities of lakes and rivers and their shores and banks; and f) protection of persons and of property. All new or redeveloped waterpower facilities that involve the construction of a dam or modification to a dam require approval under Section 14 or 16 of the LRIA (O. Reg. 454/96 sets out the projects that require approval under Sections 14 and 16). In addition, Section 23(1) of the LRIA provides for the Ministerial authority to require an owner of a dam to develop a management plan in accordance with approved guidelines. Within that management planning framework, the regulator can require operational
guidelines/requirements, rule curves and environmental flows etc. These conditions when applied to the biological requirements of Lake Sturgeon can serve as a primary tool for mitigating adverse effects on the species. To date, this provision has been applied only to waterways with existing waterpower facilities. For new projects it is the expectation that a proponent will meet the intent of water management planning, as expressed through the resultant Dam Operating Plan 3.5 Endangered Species Act (Ontario) 1 In 2007, the government of Ontario introduced a new Endangered Species Act. Compared to Ontarios previous legislation, the new act provides broader protection provisions for species at risk and their habitats, greater support for volunteer stewardship from private landowners and partners, a stronger commitment to recovery of species and more effective enforcement provisions. Ontarios Endangered Species Acts purpose is to: a) identify species at risk based on the best available scientific information, including information obtained from community knowledge and Aboriginal traditional knowledge; b) protect species that are at risk and their habitats, and to promote the recovery of species that are at risk; and c) promote stewardship activities to assist in the protection and recovery of species that are at risk.
Lake Sturgeon
17
The Act establishes a general prohibition against harming listed, extirpated, endangered or threatened species and damage or destruction to their habitat. Habitat is broadly defined to include: a) with respect to a species of animal, plant or other organism for which a regulation is in force, the area prescribed by that regulation as the habitat of the species; or b) with respect to any other species of animal, plant or other organism, an area on which the species depends, directly or indirectly, to carry on its life processes, including life processes such as reproduction, rearing, hibernation, migration or feeding, and includes places in the area described in clause (a) or (b), whichever is applicable, that are used by members of the species as dens, nests, hibernacula or other residences. Furthermore, the Ontario Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Act also includes specific regulations and exemption clauses for hydro-electric (waterpower) generating stations (Ontario Regulation 242/08 Section 11). The tools and strategies presented within the BMP Guide are therefore intended to strengthen rationale when demonstrating agreement with the criteria listed in Section 11 of the ESA (2007). Specifically Section 11 of the ESA states: (1) With respect to a species that is listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario List as an extirpated, endangered or threatened species, clause 9 (1) (a) and subsection 10 (1) of the Act do not apply to a person who is operating a hydro-electric generating station if all of the following criteria are met: 1. The person who operates the station has entered into an agreement with the Minister. 2. The agreement specifically provides that it applies to the species.
3.
4.
5. 6.
The agreement states that, i. the Minister is of the opinion that the agreement requires the person who operates the station to take reasonable steps to minimize adverse effects on the species, ii. the Minister is of the opinion that, if the agreement is complied with, the operation of the station will not jeopardize the survival or recovery of the species in Ontario, and iii. the Minister is of the opinion that the agreement does not conflict with the obligation of the Minister to ensure the implementation of any action under subsection 11 (9) of the Act. The agreement provides for monitoring the effects of the operation of the station on the species. The agreement is in force. The person who operates the station has complied with the agreement.
Further to Section 11, section 17 and 18 of the ESA also speaks to the requirement of an undertaking to demonstrate an overall benefit to the species from a proposed development and outlines the conditions and pre-requisites required before the Minister may issue a permit under the provisions of the ESA.
3.6 Conservation Authorities Act1 Ontarios 36 Conservation Authorities are empowered by the Conservation Authorities Act to undertake programs to further the conservation, restoration, development and management of natural resources on a watershed basis. Under Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act and O. Reg. 97/04 Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses, each Conservation Authority has an individual regulation approved by the Minister of Natural Resources. Section
18
28 regulations require CAs to grant permission (or not) for certain activities in and adjacent to watercourses (including valley lands), wetlands, shorelines of inland lakes and the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River System, and hazardous lands. Where no Conservation Authority exists in Ontario, the Ministry of Natural Resources governing district administers this regulation under the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act.
Subsection 28 (1) (b) speaks to prohibiting,
Where Conservation Authorities exist in Ontario, proponents should be in contact early in the planning process for information on the application process as well as pertinent distribution information of Lake Sturgeon within the CAs regulated watersheds.
3.7
Ontario Water Resources Act (Ministry of the Environment)1
regulating or requiring the permission of the authority for straightening, changing, diverting or interfering in any way with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse, or for changing or interfering in any way with a wetland.
Subsection 28 (1)(c) speaks to prohibiting,
regulating, or requiring the permission of the authority for development if, in the opinion of the authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution or the conservation of land may be affected by the development.
Section 28 (25) of the Conservation Authorities Act
defines development as: a) the construction, reconstruction, erection, or placing of a building or structure of any kind b) any change to a building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or potential use of the building or structure, increasing the size of the building or structure or increasing the number of dwelling units in the building or structure c) site grading, or d) the temporary or permanent placing, dumping, or removal of any material originating on the site or elsewhere.
The Ontario Water Resources Act (OWRA) regulates the taking of water from wells or surface water sources and the treatment and disposal of sewage. The MOE administers this act and approval may consist of a certificate of approval and/or a Permit to Take Water (PTTW) depending on the proposed undertaking. Section 34 of the OWRA requires anyone taking more than a total of 50,000 litres of water in a day from a lake, stream, river or groundwater source, with some exceptions, to obtain a PTTW. In order to obtain a PTTW, a proponent must complete and submit to the MOE an application for permit to take water. With regards to Lake Sturgeon, the requirement for a Permit to Take Water gives the RA authority to implement conditions for flow release and water quality which can be used as a mitigation tool to minimise changes in the aquatic environment, thus mitigating impacts on Lake Sturgeon.
1.
At the time of writing the Ontario Legislature is proposing the Green Energy Act, which has the potential to significantly alter the legislative requirements for waterpower projects.
Lake Sturgeon
19
4.0 History and Ecology of the Lake Sturgeon
The Lake Sturgeon is indigenous to North America and was once considered highly abundant throughout its native range (Harkness and Dymond 1961). Reports and publications such as Harkness and Dymond (1961) document the species tumultuous relationship with man throughout the history of settlement in Ontario. Historic records of sturgeon destruction and prolific waste of the resource are common. Reported as being a nuisance species by commercial fisherman in the 1800s, sturgeon were often cast ashore by the thousands when captured in their nets. The waste sturgeon were then left onshore and stacked like cordwood to season and used them as fuel within wood burning steam ships on the Great Lakes. The species was depicted as being useless and blamed for destroying commercial fishing gear and perceived as predators to lake trout and whitefish populations. Accounts of sturgeon being speared by the thousands in the Missiquoi River (which flows into Lake Champlain) are described as the fish were hauled over the bridge by a chord attached to the spear (Harkness and Dymond, 1961). The eggs would run from the spawning females so freely that they covered the bridge. This practice was eventually stopped, not for the waste but rather from the smell of the rotting eggs. Another account from 1942 (Harkness and Dymond, 1961), describes a womans memories of seeing the sturgeon on the sand bars at Point Pelee, Lake Erie in May and June in the mid-late 1800s. The sturgeon would be harvested in the shallow water from a flat bottom boat, the fish were so numerous that they could be harvested by an axe blow to the head. Only the largest fish would be taken and then boiled to release the oils from the flesh. These oils were then used as paint oil and the flesh was fed to pigs or ploughed into the ground. Very few fish were ever cooked or smoked for human consumption until the 1890s when the practice of smoking the flesh was fed to pigs or ploughed into the ground. The use of the roe for caviar gained popularity in the 1860s and led to an increase in the commercial fishing demand which
is considered to have peaked in the late 1800s and likely initiated the rapid decline in many native populations (Harkness and Dymond 1961; Brousseau 1987; Houston 1987). Another valuable product in demand that contributed to the change in the perception of Lake Sturgeon was its use in the development of isinglass. The isinglass was formed from the gelatin obtained from the swim-bladders of the sturgeon. All of these products and demands aided in changing the perception of the species however, over fishing and mismanagement of the resource along with cumulative effects of habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation have ultimately all contributed to the plight of Lake Sturgeon. Today, the abundance of Lake Sturgeon has decline significantly throughout North America to the point where the species is considered to be at risk in many regions of Canada and United States (Williams et al. 1989; Ferguson and Duckworth 1997). Along with the reduction in populations from commercial fishing, dramatic changes in riverine habitat (waste, effluent and waterpower) throughout the late 1800s and early 1900s are also considered to be a primary factor in the decline of the species and its ability to recover to historical levels (Houston 1987; Auer 1996a). In fact, globally, most sturgeon species are currently considered to be at some level of threatened status due to anthropogenic impacts (Billard and Lecointre 2001).
Lake Sturgeon
21
4.1 Distribution The current distribution of Lake Sturgeon in Ontario is illustrated in Figure 1A and 1B. Within Canada, the species is reported from Hudson-James Bay north to the Fort George River to the east and the Seal River to the west (Harkness and Dymond, 1961). Lake Sturgeon is reported to occur within the North Saskatchewan River in Alberta almost to Edmonton and within the South Saskatchewan River. The species is also reported in Lake Winnipeg, Assiniboine and Red rivers of Manitoba and all of the Hudson Bay and Great Lakes Drainage systems in Ontario and all of the Great Lakes. Finally, Lake Sturgeon occurs east to Cap Brule or to the terminus of freshwater in the St. Lawrence River (Scott and Crossman, 1973). The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) is responsible for assessing the status of each wildlife species that it considers to be at risk. Based on the committees assessment, recommendations for listing under the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) as Extirpated, Endangered, Threatened or of Special Concern are made. In November 2006, COSEWIC divided Lake Sturgeon in Canada into eight separate populations, or designatable units (DU), and assessed each as presented in Table 1. Designatable Unit areas in Ontario are also presented Figure 1A and 1B (COSEWIC, 2006).
4.2 Biology The Lake Sturgeon is a large bodied, long lived fish with low adult mortality (Houston 1987) and a life span of approximately 50-80 years (Scott and Crossman, 1973). One Lake Sturgeon, considered to be the oldest known specimen, was captured on Lake of the Woods and estimated to be 154 years old (Scott and Crossman 1973). Further to this, the largest documented Lake Sturgeon was 140 kg, measuring 2.4 m and was captured in Batchewana Bay, Lake Superior (Harkness and Dymond 1961). Lake Sturgeon are a bottom feeding species and search for food by remaining close to the bottom of a water body and detects prey through sensory barbells on the underside of the snout (Peterson et al. 2007). The Lake Sturgeons diet is highly variable and composed primarily of macro-invertebrates and other benthic organisms sucked up by the protrusible, tubelike mouth (Peterson et al. 2007). The Lake Sturgeon filters out non-edible material such as mud, gravel and detritus and passes them out through the opercula. Food is often worked with the mouth and is often cast out and sucked in again before ingesting (Scott and Crossman 1973). Stomach analysis of sturgeon have found crayfish, molluscs, insect larvae (Chironomids), nymphs (Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, Neuroptera), fish eggs, fishes, nematodes, leeches, amphipods, decapods and some plants (Harkness and Dymond, 1961; Peterson et al. 2007). Normal age at sexual maturity in Lake Sturgeon ranges from 12 to 20 years for males, with some reports of sexual maturation occurring as early as 8 years of age (Houston, 1987). Female Lake Sturgeon generally reach sexual maturity between 20 to 30 years of age (Scott and Crossman 1973) however, some studies note sexual maturity occurring as early as 14 to 23 years (Houston, 1987).
Table 1.
Lake Sturgeon Designatable Units in Canada

COSEWIC Status
Designatable Name of Population Unit
DU1 DU2 DU3 DU4 DU5 DU6 DU7 DU8
Western Hudson Bay Saskatchewan River Nelson River
Endangered Endangered Endangered
Red-Assiniboine Rivers Lake Winnipeg Endangered Winnipeg River English River Lake-of-the-Woods Rainy River Southern Hudson Bay James Bay Great Lakes Upper St. Lawrence Endangered Special concern Special concern Threatened
Courtesy: www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/species-especes/faq/faq_lakesturgeon_e.asp
22
The dispersion and migration of Lake Sturgeon throughout their habitat is highly variable between spawning seasons and may range from localised movement (<5 km) (Threader and Brousseau, 1986) to large migrations (150 km) between foraging, over-wintering and spawning habitat (Sandilands, 1987). Of primary importance to the distribution and abundance of Lake Sturgeon is water velocity, temperature, depth and substrates within their native habitat. Migration upstream into rivers may begin just prior to or shortly after rivers become ice free (Figure 6). Further to this however, fish may also stage within rivers, downstream of spawning areas the preceding fall (Rusak and Mosindy 1997). Although many biologists believe that juvenile Lake Sturgeon can recognize their natal stream within only a few months after hatching and are known to migrate up to 200 km when returning to natal streams, spawning-site fidelity has not been wellstudied, and the environmental cues that trigger and guide fish during these migrations are unknown (Peterson et al. 2007). Feeding does not occur during the spawning migration which may exceed 200 km and be as far as 400 km up river (Kempinger, 1988; Vladykov, 1955). Males generally arrive at the spawning grounds before females. Observations of sturgeon congregating and completely leaping out of the water in and around spawning sites are common (Bruch and Binkowski, 2002). Females are in spawning condition for only a very short period, typically individual females complete spawning in 8 to 12 hours, and observations of spawning females with free-running eggs are rare (Harkness and Dymond, 1961; Peterson et al. 2007). Males usually remain on the spawning site as long as a ripe female is present (Peterson et al. 2007). Intervals between spawning periods is also highly variable and may only occur every 4 to 6 years in females and every 2 to 3 years in males (Harkness and Dymond, 1961; Scott and Crossman 1973; Kempinger 1988). Some studies note 4 to 7 years (Roussow 1957).
Furthermore, some historic records of spawning activity indicate timid behaviour while spawning (Harkness and Dymond, 1961) yet others suggest relatively unabated behaviour amongst males and females suggesting variable behaviour (Bruch and Binkowski, 2002). Females deposit their eggs over several days and spawning groups generally consist of 1 or 2 males for each female (Scott and Crossman, 1973). No nest construction takes place as eggs are highly adhesive (Scott and Crossman, 1973). Eggs adhere to substrates during the incubation period. The presence of prime substrates during spawning is critical to the adhesion process as eggs will adhere to many surfaces (Threader et al. 1998). Optimal substrates for spawning are cobble and boulder (Threader et al.1998) while sub-optimal substrates such as fine cobbles, gravels and detritus can significantly reduce spawning success if flushing flows occur during the incubation stage and carry the eggs downstream (Tecsult pers. comm., 2008). Spawning within rivers occurs over large clean cobble and boulders in swift or rapidly moving water 0.3 to 6 m deep (Scott and Crossman, 1973; Threader et al.1998). Reports in the St. Lawrence have spawning occurring in as deep as 10 m (McGrath, 2008) while other reports in the Great Lakes suggest spawning may occur between 9 to 12 m deep, again indicating variable behaviour (Manny and Kennedy 2002). Spawning may also occur above groundwater up welling currents and on the outside of river bends and meanders. General substrate parameters include areas where substrates are greater than 15 cm in diameter and are silt free and not covered by algae. Spawning on the downstream side of impassable barriers and dams in approximately 1 to 5 m depth is a common location (Auer, 1982). One study noted optimal flows as 0.6 to 2.5 m/sec with a median flow velocity of 1.5 m/ sec (Thuemler, 1991) while a Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) noted optimal flows during spawning ranged from 0.15 to 0.70 m/sec (Threader et al.1998). A third study also reported spawning fish preferred shallow water with current velocities exceeding 0.15 m/sec with no eggs being found at sampling stations with water velocity was less than 0.1 m/sec (Kempinger 1988).
Lake Sturgeon
23
Spawning generally occurs in late May and continues until late June and is highly dependant on water temperatures (Harkness and Dymond, 1961; Peterson et al. 2007). It is also important to note that there may be separate spawning runs within a single season as temperatures change with the season (Auer and Baker 2002; Harkness and Dymond, 1961). Spawning activity is highly variable and may occur between 8.5 and 18C (Scott and Crossman, 1973; Harkness 1923; Nichols et al. 2003) with optimal spawning temperatures reported between 14 and 16C (Auer, 1982; Kempinger 1988; Auer 1996b). Reports from the St. Lawrence River also suggest optimal temperatures being between 12C and 15C (LaHaye et al. 1992). Within lakes, spawning occurs along rocky shoals, high energy (wave washed) shorelines and ridges (Houston, 1987). Where suitable spawning habitat is not present, sturgeon have been noted to spawn along rocky ledges receiving high wave action or along the shorelines of islands (Scott and Crossman, 1973). Eggs incubate for 8 to 14 days (Kempinger 1988; LaHaye et al. 1992) and upon hatching are nourished by a large yolk sac up to approximately 18 days old Newly hatched larvae are pelagic, negatively phototactic, and move about actively in search of suitable hiding places within the interstitial spaces of the rocky substrates where they were spawned (Kempinger 1988, LaHaye et al. 2007). The optimal temperature for egg development and survival has been noted between 14C and 17C with an upward lethal temperature of approximately 20 C (Wang et al. 1985). Interesting to note is that natural hatching rate estimates are noted as less than 1% indicating high egg loss (Nicols et al. 2003). Within 13 to 19 days after hatching larvae emerge from the substrate at night and disperse downstream, often drifting with the current several kilometres before settling on the bottom again
(Kempinger 1988, LaHaye et al. 2007). Peak periods of drift are reported nocturnally between 2100 hrs and 0200 hrs (Kempinger 1988), the duration of which may last as long as 40 days (Auer and Baker 2002). The exact timing of the downstream dispersal appears variable however a minimum temperature of 16C seems to trigger this behaviour (Smith and King 2005). Lake Sturgeon resemble miniature adults and may reach 123 mm by September of their first year (Scott and Crossman, 1973). Juveniles are known to reside on gravely shoals near river mouths, within rivers or in shallow water areas for the first couple of years. Growth among juveniles (up to five years of age) is considered to be quite rapid in length but limited in weight, whereas growth from juvenile to adulthood (5 to 15 years), the rate of growth is reported to decrease in length but focuses more on weight gain (Scott and Crossman, 1973). Adults are known to reside and forage along productive shoals in large river systems and lakes in depths ranging from 4.6 to 9.2 m (Harkness and Dymond 1961).
4.3 Life History Hydrograph The following hydrograph depicts a generic regulated and unregulated river mean annual flow and highlights the key life history details for Lake Sturgeon in relation to annual flows (Figure 6). It is important to note that the following hydrograph is not typical of all systems rather a generic depiction of an Ontario river.
24
Figure 6. Typical Hydrograph for a Generic Regulated and Unregulated River with Key Lake Sturgeon Life
History Details Superimposed Notes A. Migration upstream into rivers may begins just prior to or shortly after rivers become ice free and coincides with the spring freshet. Males generally arrive at the spawning grounds before females. Observations of sturgeon congregating and completely leaping out of the water in and around spawning sites are common. Spawning on the downstream side of impassable barriers and dams in approximately 0.3 to 6 m depth is a common location. Reports in the St. Lawrence have spawning occurring in as deep as 10 m while other reports in the Great Lakes suggest spawning may occur between 9 and 12 m deep. Optimal flows for spawning are reported to range from 0.15 m/sec to 2.5 m/sec. B. Spawning generally occurs in late May and continues until late June and is highly dependant on water temperatures. Also important is that there may be separate spawning runs within a single season as temperatures change. Spawning activity is highly variable and may occur between 8.5 and 18 C with optimal spawning temperatures reported between 14 and 16 C. C. Eggs adhere to substrates during the incubation period. The presence of prime substrates during spawning is critical to the adhesion process as eggs will adhere to most surfaces. Optimal substrates for spawning are cobble and boulder while sub-optimal substrates such as fine cobbles, gravels and detritus can significantly reduce spawning success if flushing flows occur during the incubation stage and carry the eggs downstream D. Eggs incubate for 8 to 14 days and upon hatching are nourished by a large yolk sac up to approximately 18 days old. The optimal temperature for egg development
and survival has been noted between 14 to 17 C with an upward lethal temperature of approximately 20C. After emergence, larval fish drift downstream with peak periods of drift reported nocturnally between 2100 hrs and 0200 hrs, the duration of which may last as long as 40 days. Lake Sturgeon larvae may reach 21 mm after 16 days from emergence and begin feeding after their yolk sac is absorbed E. After two weeks form hatching young Lake Sturgeon resemble miniature adults and reach 123 mm before September of their first year. Juveniles are known to reside on gravely shoals near river mouths, within rivers or in shallow water areas for the first couple of years. Growth amongst juveniles (up to five years of age) is considered to be quite rapid in length but limited in weight, whereas growth from juvenile to adulthood (5 to 15 years), the rate of growth is reported to decrease in length but focus more on weight gain. F. The dispersion and migration of Lake Sturgeon throughout their habitat is highly variable between spawning seasons and may range from localised movement (<5 km) to large migrations (150 km) between foraging, over-wintering and spawning habitat. Of primary importance to the distribution and abundance of Lake Sturgeon is water velocity, temperature, depth and substrates within their native habitat. G. Adults are known to reside and forage along productive shoals in large river systems and lakes in depths ranging from 4.6 to 9.2 m. Some fish may also stage within rivers, downstream of spawning areas the preceding fall within refuge pools.
Lake Sturgeon
25
5. Lake Sturgeon and Dams
The ecological effects of dams on biodiversity both at the local and global scale are well documented (Williams et al. 1989; Zhong and Power 1996; Cada 1998). Further to this however, the Lake Sturgeon is a species of fish that is suspected of being susceptible to the effects of waterpower facilities and dams (Haxton, 2007; Breining, 2003). For this reason, the identification of potential impacts on Lake Sturgeon from waterpower facilities must first begin with a firm understanding of the proposed practices and processes of such a facility as well as a firm understanding of life history requirement of the species. The following section focuses on identifying potential impacts as they relate to general activities of a waterpower facility, namely the 1) construction and encroachment of the facility, 2) the generation of power, 3) the spilling of water and 4) the storage of water. It is the intention of this BMP Guide to understand the systemic and potential cumulative impacts of the primary activities of a waterpower facility and trace these activities through identified stressors related to Lake Sturgeon biology and their ultimate impact on Lake Sturgeon. By understanding the pathways in which these activities lead to impacts, this BMP Guide shows how stressors can be minimized at an earlier stage in the project. These strategies therefore, may ultimately lessen or eliminate the impacts on Lake Sturgeon.
Lake Sturgeon
27
6.0 Impact Identification
The following sections focus on the identification of impacts to Lake Sturgeon stemming from the four activities associated with a waterpower facility as stated in Section 2.3 of the BMP Guide. The means in which these activities lead to potential impacts on Lake Sturgeon are presented in Figures 7 to 10, Pathways of Effect Diagrams and are based on the best available science, project experience and case studies to date. Important to note, for the purposes of the BMP Guide, the term Generation is in regards to the regular intake (penstock) and discharge (tailrace) of water for the purpose generating electricity. In contrast, the term Spill is in regards to the temporary discharge of water from a reservoir in response to surplus water levels or to meet other objectives. Anthropogenic or social impacts resulting from each of the four activities related to waterpower facilities have been identified below. Generally speaking, activities associated with waterpower facilities have the potential to increase the congregation and density of sturgeon in certain areas, making them more vulnerable to exploitation and over fishing. The mechanisms in which this occurs differs among the four activities (1) construction and encroachment of the facility, 2) the generation of power, 3) the spilling of water and 4) the storage of water), but the potential outcome of overexploitation or susceptibility of the species can be the same unless effective mitigation is implemented.
6.1 Encroachment Project Footprint 6.1.1 Impact Identification The construction, permanent occupancy, and overall project footprint of a waterpower facility are referred to as the project encroachment. Impacts to the natural environment, and Lake Sturgeon by extension, can be characterized by six primary stressors as presented in the following section. Specifically, these stressors include (Figure 7): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Dam Footprint Creation of Diversion Channel Powerhouse Footprint Head Pond / Reservoir Creation Access Roads and Bridges Power Corridor Footprint
It is widely accepted in the literature that one of the primary threats to Lake Sturgeon from waterpower (i.e. dams) are factors related to habitat loss (spawning habitat) and habitat fragmentation (Houston 1987; Ferguson and Duckworth 1997; Baker and Borgeson, 1999). Specifically, habitat fragmentation is typically caused by the unmitigated physical obstruction of a dam and can lead to changes in upstream and downstream migration of Lake Sturgeon (Auer, 1999; Bemis and Findeis, 1994; Breining, 2003; Lauer, 1988). Further to this, prime locations for waterpower facilities are areas where a natural drop (change in head) may be utilized for generation. Coincidently, these locations are often found at impassable barriers to fish and coincide with prime Lake Sturgeon spawning habitat (Friday pers. comm., 2008). To this end, there is ever increasing evidence in the literature suggesting that regulated flows on river systems can disrupt normal spawning patterns (Fernndez-Pasquier 1999). Further indirect consequences of habitat fragmentation include impacts
Lake Sturgeon
29
Figure 7. Encroachment Project Footprint Pathways of Effect
30
to spawning and recruitment success (DesLandes et al. 1994) and a loss of genetic diversity (Ferguson and Duckworth, 1997), as well as restricting or isolating sturgeon to reaches where habitat is not suitable for all life history requirements (Beamesderfer and Farr, 1997). In most instances, the footprint and encroachment of a waterpower facility (including diversion channel and power house footprint) ultimately results in a change in stream morphology and river hydraulics (Carson et al. 1991, Summer and Stritzinger, 1994) and has been demonstrated to affect flow regimes, erosion and turbidity levels (Lamontagne and Gilbert, 1990), as well as changes in thermal dynamics (Lauer, 1988). Changes in the natural dynamics of a stream hydrograph and flow regime may result in changes to overall Lake Sturgeon health, bioenergetics and physical alterations to fish habitat (McKinley and Power, 1998). Changes to flow regimes have also been demonstrated to result in poor reproductive success and stranding of adults (Auer 1998), exposure and desiccation of eggs due to dewatering of spawning sites (Kempinger 1988), egg mortality due to asphyxiation from egg clumping (Tecsult pers. comm, 2008). Furthermore, in addition to the aforementioned impacts related to habitat, the construction of access roads and bridges has the potential to cause further anthropogenic (social) impacts to Lake Sturgeon. Specifically, roads and bridges into remote locations provide the opportunity for increased access to the resource by people and fishing pressure. The encroachment and construction of these features also leads to the removal and loss of riparian vegetation and can lead to the overall degradation of fish habitat and channel stability (FERC, 2007). Specific case studies within the literature provide evidence that if unmitigated; the effects of encroachment of a project can result in changes to the productive capacity of the Lake Sturgeon resource (Scott and Crossman, 1973).
6.2 Generation 6.2.1 Impact Identification Potential impacts to the natural environment and Lake Sturgeon associated with generation of power can be characterized by three primary stressors as presented in the following section. Specifically, these stressors include (Figure 8): 1. 2. 3. Social Stressors Turbine Stressors Operational Stressors
With respect to social impacts, waterpower facilities of all scales have to potential to alter natural flow conditions within a watercourse. With regards to generation, the flows present at the base of the powerhouse and tailrace have the potential for causing crowding of fish in refuge areas, thus creating greater susceptibility to fishing pressure. In these cases the physical barrier of the dam does not cause the impact, rather the flows (if limiting) may lead to further anthropogenic stressors (Findlay et al. 1994).
Lake Sturgeon
31
Figure 8. Generation Pathways of Effect
32
Furthermore, impacts related to turbine stressors on fish in the generation of power are also well documented (Cado et al. 2007, Sale et al. 1997) and commonly relate to direct strike (EPRI, 2006), shear stress (Cado et al. 2007, Killgore et al. 2001) and pressure stress (Cada, 2001). These types of impacts can lead to effects on survivorship and overall health of Lake Sturgeon migrating downstream during larval drift and juvenile stages (Cado et al. 2007). If unmitigated, turbine stresses may ultimately impact the rearing and recruitment success of Lake Sturgeon in a system and thus change the productive capacity of the resource. The flow requirements for generation from an operations perspective can also result in a change in stream hydraulics and water quality (FERC, 2007) based on flow requirements and the type of operation. Changes in stream flow and water quality has not only been demonstrated to negatively affect erosion and aggradation rates (Environnement Illimit inc. 2004a) but has the ability to impact fish bioenergetics (McKinley and Power, 1998) and cause a net loss in sturgeon habitat (m2) during periods of low flow (Brousseau and Goodchild, 1989; Environnement Illimite Inc, 2004). The impacts of flow requirements on larval drift and juvenile migration are of particular importance to the survivorship of Lake Sturgeon in a regulated system. A primary concern throughout the literature focuses on the requirement for natural flows during larval drift downstream of facilities (Lauer, 1988). Specifically, the concern is in regards to peaking facilities and the practice of shutting down completely in the evenings to allow for storage levels in reservoirs to increase. The concern in regards to Lake Sturgeon, is that larval drift is considered to be most active nocturnally and has been reported to peak between 2100 hrs and 0200 hrs (Kempinger 1988). To this end, the requirement for natural/minimum flow requirements in the evenings appears to be of primary importance to larval fish survival (Lauer, 1988). Furthermore, the exposure and desiccation of eggs due to dewatering of spawning sites (Kempinger 1988) and egg mortality due to asphyxiation from clumping (Tecsult pers. Comm., 2008) are further impacts related to operational stressors in power generation.
Similarly, changes in the natural dynamics of a streams hydrograph and flow regime have been shown to result in changes to overall fish health, bioenergetics and a net loss of fish habitat (Parsley and Beckman, 1994). These impacts (and their potential to be cumulative) can lead to changes in spawning success related to egg adhesion, incubation (Parsley and Beckman, 1994), rearing and recruitment success of Lake Sturgeon. Furthermore, fluctuating water levels have also been discussed in the literature related to impacts on critical overwintering habitat downstream of dams, pre-spawning and spawning habitat (Lauer, 1988), effects on egg hatching and larval drift (Lauer, 1988). All of these factors contribute to the potential changes to the productive capacity of the sturgeon resource if unmitigated.
6.3 Operational Storage 6.3.1 Impact Identification Potential impacts to the natural environment and Lake Sturgeon associated with the storage of water for waterpower facilities can be characterized by two primary stressors as presented in the following section. Specifically, these stressors include (Figure 9): 1. 2. Social Stressors Variations in Water Levels
Lake Sturgeon
33
Figure 9. Storage Pathways of Effect
34
With respect to social impacts, large variations in water levels in storage bays and reservoirs have been demonstrated to cause the crowding of fish in refuge areas or small reservoirs during periods of low water levels or under ice conditions (Dumont et al., 2006; Tecsult pers. comm., 2008). The crowding of fish, in particular Lake Sturgeon, can lead to detrimental effects (Messier and Roy, 1987) as the potential for increasing their susceptibility to anthropogenic effects may result. Further to this, reservoirs and impoundments have the potential to significantly alter the quality of habitat on regulated systems. Changes in thermal regimes (Lauer, 1988), nutrient dynamics and dissolved oxygen (gases) (Greig et al. 1986; Jager and Smith, 2008), as well as sediment and turbidity have all been noted in the literature (Baxter and Glaude 1980). Such impacts may negatively impact the aquatic environment downstream in a regulated system. Variations in water levels have also been documented to have effects on macroinvertebrate density (Haxton and Findlay 2008). In regards to thermal regimes, temperatures both upstream and downstream of dams have been noted to change from natural conditions on regulated rivers (Zhong and Power 1996). These impacts may be manifested in earlier freezing and later thawing of reservoirs in regulated rivers (Baxter and Glaude, 1980). Furthermore, standing water in reservoirs has increased potential for solar absorption and can result in increased surface water temperatures and thermal stratification (Wetzel 2001). In instances where top draw designs are constructed, water temperatures downstream of a dam may be dramatically altered. Similarly, water temperatures may decrease or increase downstream of a dam depending on where the water is drawn from in the water column (hypolimnion or epilimnion) (Baxter and Glaude 1980). Dams may also serve as sediment traps and have been shown in some cases to decrease downstream turbidity and sediment loading (Liu and Yu 1992). As a result, systems transformed from unregulated to regulated may effectively transform from allochthonous systems into autotrophic systems (Friedl and Wuest 2002) resulting in a loss of riverian habitat for Lake Sturgeon.
Other impacts related to variations in water levels include changes in contaminant concentrations in water (either through natural or anthropogenic processes) (Messier et al. 1985). Variations in water levels and reservoir impoundments have also been attributed to increases in mercury methylation, an effect that may last up to 20-30 years after the initial impoundment (Rosenberg et al. 1997; Hydro Quebec, 2001). The production of methylmercury is in response to the flooding of naturalized areas with large amounts of organic matter present as well as anaerobic bacterial activity and chemical parameters of the water (pH, dissolved oxygen, oxidation-reduction potential) (Hydro-Quebec, 2001). The quantity of methylmercury produced is primarily dependant on the size, duration and water residence time within the reservoir (Brouard et al., 1990; Jones et al., 1986; Doyon et al., 1996). The uptake of mercury in the food-chain is bio-accumulating with greatest accumulation occurring within piscivorous fish (HydroQuebec, 2001). Non-piscivorous fish however, in particular benthivores such as Lake Sturgeon, remain susceptible to increases in mercury concentrations and may ultimately be affected by changes in the aquatic community structure as a result of increased mercury concentrations (Hydro-Quebec, 2001). There are some references in the literature to effects of mercury in White Sturgeon demonstrating a link to poor reproductive physiology, growth and condition (Fiest et al. 2005), however impacts on Lake Sturgeon remain largely undefined. Regardless, changes in mercury concentrations in Lake Sturgeon can/may lead to health risks if consumed by humans (Messier and Roy, 1987). Other impacts stemming from variations in water level stressors include impacts to spawning success (egg desiccation) within reservoirs as well as stranding of juveniles in near shore areas effected by drawdown (Tecsult pers. comm., 2008; Haxton pers. comm., 2009). When reservoir water levels are drawn down in the spring, egg incubation within reservoir tributaries
Lake Sturgeon
35
used as spawning habitat can be effected (Noakes et al 1999). These changes in environmental conditions can ultimately change the structure of the aquatic community, impacting sturgeon survival and health, spawning and recruitment success (Environnement Illimite Inc, 2004; Haxton and Findlay in print) and ultimately cause a change in the productive capacity of the Lake Sturgeon resource.
6.4 Spill 6.4.1 Impact Identification Potential impacts to the natural environment and Lake Sturgeon associated with the spilling of water at waterpower facilities can be characterized by two primary stressors as presented in the following section. Specifically, these stressors include (Figure 10): 1. 2. Social Stressors Variable Water Level Stressors / Temporary Flow Events
Similar to the previously stated waterpower activities, potential social impacts of waterpower projects on Lake Sturgeon can be associated with variations in water levels within the spillways of many facilities (Brousseau and Goodchild, 1989). Large variations in water levels within the spillways can cause the crowding or stranding of fish in refuge areas or small standing pools creating greater susceptibility to fishing pressure (Tecsult pers. comm., 2008).
Other impacts related to the large variations in spillway flows and the temporary flow events include changes in water quality parameters (Sale et al. 1997), dissolved oxygen concentrations and changes in temperature (Bruch and Binkowski, 2002). In essence, many of the changes and fluctuations in water quality and temperature are a result of the environmental changes occurring within the upstream reservoir/head pond (as described in Section 6.3.1 Storage Impact Identification). As water is flushed from the reservoir in times of surplus, the aquatic environment directly downstream of the facility is dramatically altered over a very short period of time. These large flushing events have been documented to effect sediment transport downstream (Summer and Stritzinger, 1994), physical habitat structure (Brousseau and Goodchild, 1989), and erosion rates (Brousseau and Goodchild, 1989). In addition, flushing and displacement of Lake Sturgeon within spillways during times of high flow has been documented to cause stranding and injury to fish (Evans et al. 1993). All of these variables result in changes to environmental conditions and ultimately lead to potential impacts on Lake Sturgeon health, as well as spawning success (egg deposition, incubation, hatch and larval drift), rearing and recruitment success (Tecsult pers. comm., 2008).
36
Figure 10. Spill Pathways of Effect
Lake Sturgeon
37
7. Best Management Practices
Through the review of best available science and project case studies, strategies to avoid, redesign, mitigate and compensate/offset the potential impacts of the project footprint, such as location of the facility, are more easily implemented when they are considered during the planning stage of the project in general (Section 9). Avoidance begins through a firm understanding of the subject ecosystem and Lake Sturgeon populations within that system. Understanding the ecology of the project environment and biota should be obtained through a detailed fish and fish habitat baseline conditions study. This study will vary with the size/scale and type of waterpower facility but should be scoped through regulatory agency consultation and should emphasize sensitivities of the habitat/species within the system and focus on the development of target thresholds for monitoring pre, during and post construction (Figure 4 Project Screening Overview). Short term mitigations such as those undertaken during construction of the facility should follow the DFO Pathways of Effect Diagrams and Standard Operational Statements (Appendix A and B). Once constructed however, a variety of mitigations and compensation/offsetting strategies may be implemented based on the best available science and case studies to limit long term and cumulative impacts to the Lake Sturgeon resource. The following section focuses on the Best Management Practices developed for the purposes of this guide and are implemented through the Modified Pathways of Effect Figures illustrated below (Figures 11 to 14). Specific references to case studies provided in this section are expanded upon in the Annotated Bibliography in Appendix C (Lake Sturgeon Literature Review).
7.1 M1 Management of Recreational Fishing Pressure / Sanctuaries Many conventional fisheries management approaches focus on regulations to prohibit, or severely limit harvest (Johnson 1987). As of January 1, 2009 the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources has introduced regulations limiting the recreational fishery for Lake Sturgeon to a catch-and-release program (MNR, 2009). Furthermore, the commercial fishing industry for Lake Sturgeon in Ontario has also been closed as of January 1, 2009 (MNR, 2009). Although such programs may result in higher numbers of spawners, and higher recruitment, several authors suggest that these types of restrictions alone are insufficient to recover Lake Sturgeon stocks owing to the species low reproductive rate and loss or degradation of habitat for many populations (Peterson et al. 2007). In short, with the level of fishing mortality on Lake Sturgeon already presumed to be low, efforts to further decrease adult mortality may have little effect on population growth. Facilitating survival of juveniles however, may have the greatest effect on populations. Given the habitat and life history challenges, Lake Sturgeon restoration or sustainability will require a long-term approach addressing the protracted reproduction cycle of the species that requires the success of many juvenile and adult year classes to sustain a population (Noakes et al. 1999). Revisions to recreational fishing regulations and the designation of fish sanctuaries represent two aspects of a suite of Best Management Practices to mitigate potential impacts and promote long-term sustainability of the species. Further readings referencing the need and benefits of harvest limitations and sanctuaries are provided in Appendix C as follows:
Lake Sturgeon
39
Figure 11. Modified Encroachment Project Footprint Pathways of Effect
40
Figure 12. Modified Generation Pathways of Effect
Lake Sturgeon
41
Figure 13. Modified Storage Pathways of Effect
42
Figure 14.
Modified Spill Pathways of Effect
Lake Sturgeon
43
Brousseau, C.S. 1987. The lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in Ontario, p. 2-9. In C.H. Olver (ed.) Proceedings of a workshop on the lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens). Ont. Fish. Tech. Rep. Ser. 23. Brousseau, C.S., and G.A. Goodchild, 1989: Fisheries and yields in the Moose River basin, Ontario, p. 145-158 Cuerrier, J.-P. 1949b: Observations sur lesturgeon de lac (Acipenser fulvescens Raf.) dans la region du lac Saint-Pierre au cours de la priode du frai. Doroshov, S.I., R.M. Bruch, and F.P. Binkowski. 2004: The past and present of sturgeon management and rehabilitation. Kohlhorst, D.W., L.W. Botsford, J.S. Brennan, and G.M. Cailliet. 1991: Aspects of the structure and dynamics of an exploited central California population of white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus). Nowak, A.M., and C.S. Jessop. 1987: Biology and management of the Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the Groundhog and Mattagami Rivers, Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2006: Proposal for Managing the Recreational Fishery for Lake Sturgeon in Ontario. Swanson, G. 1986. An interim report on the fisheries of the lower Nelson River and the impacts of hydroelectric development, 1985 data. Manit. Dept. Nat. Res. Fish. Br. MS. Rep. 86-19: xx + 228 p. Threader, R.W., and C.S. Brousseau. 1986: Biology and management of the Lake Sturgeon in the Moose River.
7.2 M2 Public Education of Fishing Regulations Public consultation and engagement is a primary tool in educating the public regarding the Lake Sturgeon resource. This may be achieved in the early stages of the planning process through public notifications and public information centers. The engagement of the public also provides the opportunity to gain local knowledge of the Lake Sturgeon resource as well as the potential for further understanding natural processes typical of the project study area. Further readings noting the importance of public involvement as a form of management and recovery are provided in Appendix C as follows: Auer, N.A. (ed.) 2003: A Lake Sturgeon rehabilitation plan for Lake Superior.
7.3 M3 Minimize Public Access and Alternative Navigation Strategies such as minimizing public access to the project area (Dubuc et al. 1996) are management strategies that may be employed at facilities to minimize the potential social/anthropogenic impacts of waterpower projects (Tecsult pers. comm., 2008). One case study from the Rivieres des Prairies dam spillway in Quebec documents the excavation of a canal strategically constructed to minimize public access to a shallow area of the river located in front of the dam spillway (Dubuc et al., 1996). The canal construction was part of the habitat compensation plan which also involved the restoration of Lake Sturgeon spawning grounds within the dam spillway. The canal therefore, acted as a barrier to the public and minimized access to Lake Sturgeon spawning habitat. Management strategies such as this, as well as construction of fencing around dam tailraces and spillways, have shown to be effective in minimizing public access to areas where fish may congregate. To this end, limiting public access may be
44
used as an initial mitigation tool in minimizing impacts to Lake Sturgeon (Tecsult pers. comm., 2008). The following publication in Appendix C further details this strategy: Dubuc, N., S. Thibodeau, J. DesLandes, and R. Fortin. 1996: Utilisation du milieu en priode de fraie abundance des gniteurs et succs de reproduction de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) la frayre de la rivire des Prairies au printemps de 1996. Motivation for providing alternative access/navigation around waterpower facilities is based on the intent to minimize exposure of potentially sensitive Lake Sturgeon habitat to increased human traffic. As noted in the literature, Lake Sturgeon often congregate on the downstream side of dams and spillways to spawn and therefore become susceptible to anthropogenic impacts (Scott and Crossman, 1973). Provisions for alternative access/navigation in the form of portage trails, boat ramps, boat launches, lock systems etc, around the facility may serve as effective avoidance tools in minimizing exposure of Lake Sturgeon sensitive habitat.
(Duda, 2008). The program was undertaken to use both Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge and current inventory/ sampling techniques to collect baseline information on the dynamics of the populations and document the distribution, habitat use and seasonal movement patterns of the various life history stages. One of the primary objectives of the study was to engagement of Aboriginal peoples in the recovery of species at risk and their habitats (Duda, 2008). The traditional ecological knowledge provided by First Nations communities is essential to the long term conservation and recovery of the Lake Sturgeon because many of the populations exist within these communities. Further to this, in many areas of Northern Ontario, the First Nations communities may be the only source of historical information on local Lake Sturgeon populations (Dick and MacBeth, 2003). To this end the involvement of First Nations is also considered an essential component to any detailed fish and fish habitat baseline conditions study designed at the outset of a project (Figure 4). Further readings noting the importance of First Nations involvement in Lake Sturgeon management and recovery are referenced in Appendix C as follows: Campbell, R. 2005: Comments on the draft EIS for the EM-LA/ Rupert Diversion Project as related to Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens). Cox, D. 2004: History of fishing regulation development on the Menominee Indian reservation. Dick, T.A., and B. MacBeth. 2003: First Nations participation in determining the status of a species at risk. Duda, M. 2008: Winnipeg River Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) Assessment Program 2008 Progress Report.
7.4 M4 First Nations Consultation Consultation with First Nations in the conservation of Lake Sturgeon is an active management strategy that may be employed at facilities to minimize the potential social/ anthropogenic impacts of a waterpower project as noted in the literature (Dick and MacBeth, 2003 Appendix C). One case study from the literature (2007) involved a partnership between the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Wabaseemoong Independent First Nations, Ontario Power Generation and The Department of Fisheries and Oceans to undertake a study to assess the status of the Winnipeg River sturgeon population and attain the information that would ultimately be required to design and implement a successful recovery plan
Lake Sturgeon
45
7.5 M5 Water Level Management in Reservoirs Effective management of water levels within head pond/ reservoirs is essential in avoiding / mitigating both upstream and downstream impacts to Lake Sturgeon populations as discussed in Section 6.3 and 6.4. Large variations in water levels in storage bays and reservoirs have been demonstrated to cause the crowding of fish in refuge areas or small reservoirs during periods of low water levels or under ice conditions (Dumont et al., 2006; Tecsult pers. comm., 2008). The crowding of fish, in particular Lake Sturgeon, can lead to detrimental effects (Messier and Roy, 1987) as the potential for increasing their susceptibility to anthropogenic effects may result (Dumont et al. 2006), (Tecsult pers. comm., 2008). Some mitigation strategies noted through project experience include low head weirs within littoral zones of embayment to maintain water levels during periods of low flow or spill to avoid juvenile mortality through stranding (Hayeur, 2001; Tecsult pers. comm., 2008). To this end, a Best Management Practice to minimizing such effects is through the effective development, utilization and implementation of the Water Management Plan (WMP). The WMP will detail Lake Sturgeon life history requirements related to water quality, temperature and flow requirements that should be addressed in order to minimize impacts on the local populations. Furthermore, provisions made for Lake Sturgeon within the WMP will contribute to satisfying the requirements of the Fisheries Act, SARA and the Endangered Species Act as outlined in Section 3.2, 3.3 and 3.5.
The detailed specifics of the WMP are developed on a site specific level, however, a key guidance document for water management planning is referenced and annotated in Appendix C as follows. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2003: Water Management Planning Aquatic Ecosystem Guidelines (Draft to be replaced by the new LRIA Technical Guidelines). Furthermore, additional readings and mitigation strategies for minimizing impacts on fish in reservoirs are also provided in the following reference annotated in Appendix C; Hayeur, Gaetan. 2001: Summary of Knowledge Acquired in Northern Environments from 1970-2000. Montreal: Hydro-Quebec. Brousseau, C.S., and G.A. Goodchild. 1989: Fisheries and yields in the Moose River basin Clarke D.K., T.C. Pratt T.C. and R.G. Randall, D.A. Scuton and K.E. Smokorowski. 2008: Validation of the Flow Management Pathway: Effects of Altered Flow on Fish Habitat and Fishes Downstream from Hydropower Dam. Lauer, C. 1988: Identification of critical life history periods of Lake Sturgeon and factors that may affect population survival.
46
7.6 M6 Water Management Plans (existing facilities) and Dam Operating Plans (new facilities) Riverine characteristics are strongly controlled and defined by flow regime (MNR, 2003). Thus, subsequent to the planning process for a new facility the effective development, utilization and implementation of the Dam Operating Plan (DOP) (Water Management Plan) is one of the most versatile and robust Best Management Practice in avoiding and mitigating impacts on Lake Sturgeon in relation to Waterpower facilities. The strength of Water Management Planning is that the concerns of all stakeholders are considered. Water Management Planning takes into account all flow and water level requirements, including those related to Lake Sturgeon and other fish, and provides the best balanced plan to achieve as many objectives as possible. Auer (1992, 1994b, 1996b) showed that when flows from a small hydroelectric facility were made more constant (i.e., emulated natural flow conditions), this change in flow triggered the reproductive readiness of Lake Sturgeon, reduced time spent on spawning sites (a benefit to sturgeon) and allowed larger fish to migrate to spawning grounds in greater numbers. Therefore, consideration of operating regime should be taken into account in the design and operation of hydroelectric facilities where/if possible. Specific references are provided and annotated within Appendix C and include: Auer, N.A. 1992: Conservation of the threatened Lake Sturgeon. Prepared for 1992 Nongame Wildlife Fund and Living Resources Small Grants Program, Michigan Department of Natural Resources. 23 p. + app. Auer, N.A. 1994b: Effects of change in operation of a small hydroelectric facility on spawning characteristics of Lake Sturgeon. Lake Reservoir Manag. 9: 52-53.
Auer, N.A. 1996b: Response of spawning Lake Sturgeons to change in hydroelectric facility operation. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 125: 66-77. For operations of a facility, the DOP may specify flow requirements and ramping rates to coincide with seasonal migration of Lake Sturgeon spawning. The DOP can also be used to minimize impacts to flow regimes, downstream erosion rates and water quality (Environnement Illimit inc. 2004a). Furthermore, in regards to generation, the DOP can be used to minimize impacts to recruitment in providing appropriate flows for larval drift (LaHaye et al. 1992). In addition, although limited avoidance strategies exist for minimizing variations in water levels during storage and spill, effective management to minimize changes to nutrient loading, dissolved oxygen concentrations and temperature may also be achieved through the WMP (Jager and Smith, 2008). This is achieved through limiting storage time within the reservoirs (i.e. emulated natural flow conditions) which in turn may reduce changes to water quality, sediment transport, habitat structure, erosion rates and flushing/displacement of fish downstream (Jager and Smith, 2008). The detailed specifics of the WMP are developed on a site specific level, however, a key document for water management planning is referenced and annotated in Appendix C as follows. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2003: Water Management Planning Aquatic Ecosystem Guidelines (Draft to be replaced by the new LRIA Technical Guidelines).
Lake Sturgeon
47
Furthermore, additional readings referencing the benefits, successes and failures of water management planning are annotated in Appendix C as follows: Armstrong, K. 1988: Identification of critical life history periods of Lake Sturgeon and factors that may affect population survival. Boudreau, P., M. Leclerc, and Y. Secretan. 2004: Centrale de lEastmain-1-A et drivation Rupert Simulation des habitats de reproduction piscicole de la rivire Rupert avec HYDROSIM/ MODELEUR. Report prepared for HydroQubec and the Socit dEnergie de la Baie James. British Columbia Instream Flow Guideline for Fish. 2004: Instream flow thresholds for fish and fish habitat as guidelines for reviewing proposed water uses Synopsis. Brousseau, C.S., and G.A. Goodchild. 1989: Fisheries and yields in the Moose River basin. Carson, R.K., A.P. Sandilands and R.R. Evans. 1991: Hydroelectric Generating Station Extansions Mattagami River. Mattagami River Hydraulic Studies and Impacts on Fisheries Habitat. Clarke D.K., T.C.Pratt, R.G. Randall, D.A. Scuton and K.E. Smokorowski. 2008: Validation of the Flow Management Pathway: Effects of Altered Flow on Fish Habitat and Fishes Downstream from Hydropower Dam. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2005: COSEWIC species assessments (short version), May 2005. Doroshov, S.I., Bruch, R.M., and Binkowski, F.P. 2004: The past and present of sturgeon management and rehabilitation.
Environnement Illimit inc. 1994: Centrale Les Cdres Nouvel amnagement phase 2 tudes environnementales. Concepts damnagement de frayres esturgeon jaune et douvrages de montaison. Environnement Illimit inc. 2004a: Amnagement hydrolectrique de lEastmain-1 Esturgeon jaune tude dimpact et amnagements. Version finale. Friday, M.J. 2004 - 2007. The migratory and reproductive response of spawning Lake Sturgeon to controlled flows over Kakabeka Falls on the Kaministiquia River Garceau, S., Simoneau, M., Bilodeau, P. 2007: Modelling the sequence time for the reproduction of lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the River Prairie. GDG Conseil inc. 2001a: Rfection de la centrale de La Gabelle. Programme de surveillance et de suivi environnemental. Utilisation par les poissons dun nouveau secteur de fraie amnag en aval de la centrale de La Gabelle printemps 2001. GDG Conseil inc. 2001b: Rfection de la centrale de La Gabelle. Programme de surveillance et de suivi environnemental. Utilisation par lesturgeon jaune dun nouveau secteur de fraie amnag en aval de la centrale de La Gabelle printemps 2000. Guay, G., and M. Gendron 2004: Suivi de lutilisation du bassin de Pointe-desCascades par lesturgeon jaune et les autres espces 2004. Hendry, C., and C. Chang, C. 2001: Investigations of fish communities and habitat in the Abitibi Canyon Generating Station tailwater.
48
KGS Group, Environmental Applications Group, and Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Ltd. 1991: Evaluation of fish habitat mitigation at six hydrotechnical projects. Kilgo.1 ur, B.W.,J. Neary, D. Ming and D. Beach. Preliminary Investigations of the Use and Status of Instream-Flow-Needs methods in Ontario with Specific Reference to Application with Hydroelectric Developments. LaHaye, M., and M. Gendron, 1994: Reproduction de lesturgeon jaune, bief daval de Pointe-des-Cascades et de Beauharnois. Le Groupe de Recherche SEEEQ Lte. Lauer, C. 1988: Identification of critical life history periods of Lake Sturgeon and factors that may affect population survival. McKinley, S., G. Van Der Kraak, and G.Power, 1998: Seasonal migrations and reproductive patterns in the Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens, in the vicinity of hydroelectric stations in northern Ontario. Mingelbier, M., and J. Morin. 2005. Modlisation numrique 2 D de lhabitat des poissons du Saint-Laurent fluvial pour valuer limpact des changements climatiques et de la rgularisation. Nat. Can. (Qu.) 129: 96-102. Phoenix, R.D., and C.J. Rich. 1988: Utilization of a proposed small hydroelectric site on the Groundhog River by Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens. Roy, N., M. La Haye et C. Marche, 1997: tude hydrologique et gomorphologique portant sur lhabitat de fraie de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens), rivire SaintFranois prs de Drummondville, Qubec.
Sturgeon Telemetry Project Chipman Lake, 2007: Aguasabon River System Water Management Plan. Swanson, G.M., K.R. Kansas and S.M. Matkowski. 1990: A report on the fisheries resources of the lower Nelson River and the impacts of hydroelectric development, 1988 data. Thibodeau, S. 1997: Dterminants environnementaux de la drive larvaire de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens Rafinesque) la rivire des Prairies, prs de Montral et potential dutilisation du strontium radioactive (85Sr) comme marquer vital court terme des stades prcndant la dvalaison. Comme exigence partielle de la matrise en biologie. 7.6.1 Incorporating the BMP for Lake Sturgeon into Water Management Plans Existing waterpower facilities in Ontario were required to retroactively develop Water Management Plans, beginning in 2002. The approved plans define the operating regime for existing facilities, considerate of the multiple social, economic and environmental values associated with water level and flow management. WMPs were developed to address impacts and benefits related to water management (levels and flows) uses at existing waterpower installations in Ontario. They are effective in demonstrating how water level fluctuations affect the aquatic ecosystem, shoreline erosion and recreational activities. The legislation guiding waterpower project requirements for developing WMPs is the Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act.
Lake Sturgeon
49
Producers of waterpower were responsible for developing WMPs that take environmental, social and economic objectives into account and how various operating regimes may affect values within the river system. If more than one power producer operates within a watershed and cumulative impacts are anticipated, WMPs may require owners or proponents to develop joint plans to address the specific needs of the ecosystem and targeted fish species. In general, WMPs will be developed on the basis that they will:
a) Promote maximum net benefit to society
The Best Management Practices for Lake Sturgeon will assist waterpower project with approved WMPs by identifying mitigation strategies that may be applied to address potentially adverse impacts to Lake Sturgeon. The BMP does not provide prescriptive measures to address flow needs to protect Lake Sturgeon but does identify strategic points at various stages where effective water management planning can be used to mitigate for expected impacts.
7.7 M7 Provision of Sturgeon Passage Although many Lake Sturgeon populations are now protected, loss of habitat continues to threaten, or reduce the recovery of many populations. For example, dams have been constructed on every known Lake Sturgeon spawning tributary in the Great Lakes (Peterson et al. 2007). Within the literature it has been noted that very few fishways exist that specifically target passage of large fish species (i.e., fish larger than adult salmon) (Ead et al., 2004). Effective sturgeon fishways have been constructed on some low-head impoundments, and artificial spawning habitat has been introduced successfully in some rivers (Bruch 1998). Nevertheless the lack of effective fish passage systems around waterpower facilities, and other high-relief dams, continues to fragment Lake Sturgeon habitat on many river systems (Baxter 1977, Jager et al. 2001). One report notes that Lake Sturgeon passage of heads greater than five to ten feet have not yet been successfully accomplished with traditional-style fish ladders (Fish Passage Technologies, 1995). However, ongoing studies and construction of fish passage structures specifically designed for Lake Sturgeon may yet prove to hold some promise for sustaining and restoring populations where dams limit access to suitable spawning habitat (Peterson et al. 2007). Questions focussing on the minimum length of non-fragmented river segments required to support a viable Lake Sturgeon population is an area of study amongst researchers but minimal published research exists to date.
identify the net benefits from how water levels and flows are managed, including benefits to river users and riparian owners, as well as to power producers and find ways to maximize those benefits.
b) Promote riverine ecosystem sustainability
describe any ongoing degradation of the river ecosystem resulting from the manipulation of water levels and flows, and seek to improve the ecosystem. c) Advance planning concepts based on best available information. d) Support adaptive management characterize an approach to improve resource management, reduce areas of uncertainty, build on successes and make adjustments to limit failures. e) Address Aboriginal and treaty rights WMP to be undertaken without prejudice to these rights.
50
One passage structure on the Eastmain River in the James Bay Region of Quebec has reported minimal success in passing Lake Sturgeon (Tecsult, 2007). The specific project involves the Eastmain River PK 207 weir that includes a natural channel fishway integrated into the structure to provide fish passage into the forebay where additional forage and spawning habitat exists. This example represents current industry practice regarding Lake Sturgeon passage in Quebec, the monitoring of which may direct future design and construction methods for waterpower projects (Tecsult, 2007). It should be noted that methods to allow for fish passage upstream and downstream will be site specific and will require consideration of the ability of the fish to find and use the passage structure, the ability of the fish to navigate through the structure, physical limitations of number of fish that can pass. Specific literature and case studies cited in Appendix C related to Lake Sturgeon passage include: Aadlund, A. 2005: Passage and habitat restoration for Lake Sturgeon. Amaral, S., and T. Sullivan. 2005: Downstream fish passage for sturgeon. Amaral, S.V., F.C. Winchell, F.C., McMahon, B.J., and D.A. Dixon, D.A. 2000: Evaluation of an angled bar rack and a louver array for guiding Lake Sturgeon to a bypass. Ead, S.A., C. Katopodis, G.J. Sikora, and N. Rajaratnam. 2004: Flow regimes and structure in pool and weir fishways. Environmental Mitigations at Hydroelectric Projects. 1994: Volume II. Benefits and Costs of Fish Passage and Protection.
Environnement Illimit inc. 1994: Centrale Les Cdres Nouvel amnagement phase 2 tudes environnementales. Concepts damnagement de frayres esturgeon jaune et douvrages de montaison. Evaluation of an Angled Louver Facility for Guiding Sturgeon to a Downstream Bypass. 2006. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, Holyoke Gas & Electric Company, Holyoke, MA, and WE-Energies Inc., Milwaukee, WI: 2006. 1011786. Fish Passage Technologies: Protection at Hydropower Facilities, OTAENV-641 (Washington, DC: U.S. Givernment Printing Office, September 1995. Hayeur, Gaetan. 2001: Summary of Knowledge Acquired in Northern Environments from 1970-2000. Montreal: Hydro-Quebec. Peake, S., F.W.H. Beamish, R.S. McKinley, D.A. Scruton and C. Katopodis. 1997: Relating swimming performance of Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens, to fishway design. Scruton, D.A., R.S. McKinley, R.K. Booth, S.J. Peake and R.F. Goosney. 1998: Evaluation of swimming capability and potential velocity barrier problems for fish, Wlosinski, J.H. and C. Suprenant, 2001: Fish passage through dams on the upper Mississippi River.
Lake Sturgeon
51
7.8 M8 Relocation of Lake Sturgeon The physical relocation of sturgeon either downstream or upstream of a waterpower facility may be employed as a Best Management Practice when residual effects from other mitigation strategies prove to remain unacceptable to RAs. The relative effort required and intensive management/monitoring reported in the literature indicates this strategy as less than ideal however, when compared to capital costs of retrofitting and re-designing facilities the long-term relocation of Lake Sturgeon from spillways or around existing dams may sometimes serve to be cost effective (Fish Passage Technologies, 1995). One specific case study is that of the Adams Creek Spillway Lake Sturgeon relocation program on the Mattagami River system (Sheehan, R.W. 1990-2000). The Lake Sturgeon relocation program has been in place since 1990 when the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources indicated to Ontario Power Generation (OPG) that the Adams Creek Control Structure pools must be monitored after each spill period and stranded Lake Sturgeon were to be relocated to the Little Long GS headpond. This practice has continued since and research into finding an effective means of minimizing the Lake Sturgeon entrainment is ongoing. Specific literature and case studies cited in Appendix C relating to the relocation of Lake Sturgeon as a mitigation tool include: Brousseau, C.S., and G.A. Goodchild. 1989: Fisheries and yields in the Moose River basin. Evans, R.R., B.J. Parker and B.J. McCormick. 1993: Strategy assessment Sturgeon stranding in Adam Creek. Fish Passage Technologies: Protection at Hydropwer Facilities, OTAENV-641 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1995.
Hayeur, Gaetan. 2001: Summary of Knowledge Acquired in Northern Environments from 1970-2000. Montreal: Hydro-Quebec. McCormick, B.J., R.W. Sheehan and N. Turcotte. 1990: Ontario Hydro incident report Sturgeon relocation at Adam Creek July/August 1990. Phoenix, R.D., and C.J. Rich. 1988: Utilization of a proposed small hydroelectric site on the Groundhog River by Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens. Seyler, J., J. Evers, S. McKinley, R.R. Evans, G. Prevost, R. Carson and D. Phoenix. 1996: Mattagami River Lake Sturgeon entrainment: Little Long Generating Facilities. Sheehan, R.W. 1990-2000: Adams Creek Lake Sturgeon Relocation Program Review. Sheehan, R.W. 1992: Adam Creek Lake Sturgeon monitoring program August 1990 and July 1991. Sheehan, R.W. 2001: Lake Sturgeon diversion technology review Adam Creek Lake Sturgeon relocation program. Ontario Power Generation 1-18.
52
7.9 M9 Barriers to Upstream Migration into Spillway The implementation of barriers to upstream migration into spillways is considered to be a site specific Best Management Practice as some facility designs maintain the spillway and tailrace within the same channel reach. In cases where the spillway and tailrace are not in close proximity however (i.e., spillway is remote from tailrace), limiting fish migration upstream into the spillway is often required. Thus strategies such as barriers to upstream migration within the spillway are considered as a Best Management Practice for minimizing impacts on Lake Sturgeon. Specifically, these impacts include displacement, entrainment and stranding (individual and eggs) within spillways due to variable flows, as discussed in Section 6.4. Specific reference to barriers and diversion techniques related to spillway exclusion are not noted in the literature, however, barriers and diversion technologies that may be transferable are cited in Appendix C including: Basov, B. (1999): Behaviour of Sterlet Acipenser ruthenus and Russian Sturgeon A. gueldenstaedtii in LowFrequency Electric Fields. Seyler, J., J. Evers, S. McKinley, R.R. Evans, G. Prevost, R. Carson and D. Phoenix. 1996: Mattagami River Lake Sturgeon entrainment: Little Long generating station facilities. Sheehan, R.W. 2001: Adam Creek Lake Sturgeon relocation review 1990-2000. Sheehan, R.W. 2001: Lake Sturgeon diversion technology review Adam Creek Lake Sturgeon relocation program.
7.10 M10 Alternative Turbine Designs Minimal published literature and case studies are available to date regarding the use of alternative turbine design to minimize the impacts to Lake Sturgeon. Due to the size of adult Lake Sturgeon, it can be assumed that they can generally be protected from entrainment by fish protection measures (i.e., trash racks spaced close to one another). As a Best Management Practice however, these technologies should continue to be explored. Some examples of current research includes the Electrical Power Research Institute (EPRI) which continues research and development on turbines for hydroelectric application that are greater than 90% efficient and reduce fish mortality to 5% or less. Further to this, Brookfield Power has also indicated interest in testing an Alden/ Concepts National Robotics Engineer Center (NREC) turbine for small rivers at a site on the Mohawk River near Albany, New York (EPRI 2008). Further development studies and case studies are cited in Appendix C as follows: Cado, G.F., L.A. Garrison and R.K. Fisher Jr., 2007: Determining the Effects of Shear Stress on Fish Mortality during Turbine Passage. Hydro Review. EPRI, 2008: Fish Friendly Hydropower Turbine Development and Deployment: Phase II. Electric Power Research Institute. Palo Alta, CA.
Lake Sturgeon
53
7.11 M11 Provision of Fish Protection Measures for Entrainment The provision for fish protection measures such as diversions, deterrents and/or attraction measures for upstream and downstream movement are discussed at length in the literature however, minimal applications have been successfully transferred to waterpower intakes or spillways. In this regard, the use of angled bar racks, trash racks and louvers spaced at approximately 10 cm apart have proven to be most effective in excluding most adult sturgeon from passing through facility intakes and entering the penstock/turbines (Stanley pers. comm., 2009). Selected literature provided in Appendix C includes: Amaral, S. 2001: Evaluation of angled bar racks and louvers for guiding juvenile Lake Sturgeon (age 1). Amaral, S.V., J.L. Black, B.J. McMahon and D.A. Dixon. 2002: Evaluation of angled bar racks and louvers for guiding lake and shortnose sturgeon. Amaral, S.V., F.C. Winchell, B.J. McMahon and D.A. Dixon. 2000: Evaluation of an angled bar rack and a louver array for guiding Lake Sturgeon to a bypass. To a lesser extent, physical diversion systems employed at many thermal generating stations to minimise impacts to fish species may, in some cases, be transferable to Lake Sturgeon at facility intakes. Placing physical diversion structures upstream of spillways may not be desirable
from a flood risk perspective, however, some provision for fish protection from entrainment at intakes may include:

Traveling Screens Wedge Wire Screens Modular inclined screens Porous dikes Cylindrical Wedge Wire Screens Submersible Travelling Screens Drum Screens Magnetic and electrical barriers Air bubble Curtains Illumination Acoustic Barriers Floating fences
Note that this BMP is a constant source of research and study to explore possibilities for new methods and measures of protection during downstream passage. This is done in order to avoid the need for physical relocation of Lake Sturgeon or hatchery/stocking operations to maintain populations. Specific publications related to mitigation and protection measures and cost benefits are referenced and annotated in Appendix C as follows: Environmental Mitigations at Hydroelectric Projects. 1994: Volume II. Benefits and Costs of Fish Passage and Protection. Fish Passage Technologies: Protection at Hydropwer Facilities, OTAENV-641 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1995.
54
Further literature and case studies discussing the application and effectiveness of such measures are referenced and annotated in Appendix C as follows: Carson, R., and R.S. McKinley. 1998: Conceptual design of a protection scheme for Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens). Hayeur, Gaetan. 2001: Summary of Knowledge Acquired in Northern Environments from 1970-2000. Montreal: Hydro-Quebec. American Society of Civil Engineers Committee on Hydropower Intakes, Committee on Hydropower Intakes. (1995). Chiasson, W.B., D.L.G. Noakes and F.W.H. Beamish. 1997: Habitat, benthic prey, and distribution of juvenile Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in Northern Ontario rivers. Lovell, J.M., M.M. Findlay, R.M. Moate, J.R. Nedwell, and M.A. Pegg. 2005: The inner ear morphology and hearing abilities of the Paddlefish (Polyodon Spathula) and the Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser Fulvescens). McKinley, S., G.V.D. Kraak, and G. Power. 1998: Seasonal migration and reproductive patterns in the Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens, in the Vicinity of Hydroelectric Stations in Northern Ontario. Noakes, D.L.G., F.W.H. Beamish, and A. Rossiter. 1999: Conservation Implications of Behaviour and Growth of the Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens, in Northern Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. (1996): Mattagami river Lake Sturgeon entrainment: Little long generation station facilities.
Sagar, D.R., and C.H. Hocutt. 1987: Estuarine fish response to strobe light, bubble curtains and strobe light/bubble-curtain combinations as influenced by water flow rate and flash frequencies. Sehgal, C. K. (1996): Design Guidelines for Spillway Gates. Sheehan, R.W. 2001: Adam Creek Lake Sturgeon relocation review 1990-2000. Seyler, J. 1997: Biology of selected riverine fish species in the Moose River basin. Seyler, J., J. Evers, S. McKinley, R.R. Evans, G. Prevost, R. Carson, and D. Phoenix. 1996: Mattagami River Lake Sturgeon entrainment: Little Long generating station facilities.
7.12 M12 Existing DFO Pathways of Effect and Operational Statements DFO Pathways of Effect (POE) (see Appendix A) are an approach used within RAs (i.e., DFO, MNR) to determine possible cause-and-effect relationships between in-water or near water activities on the aquatic environment. At the beginning stages of project design, all activities that have the potential to affect fish and fish habitat in a negative way are identified, and methods for eliminating or mitigating each of the pathways of effect are evaluated. By following this approach, a clear understanding of potential aquatic impacts can be demonstrated up-front, and an assessment of residual risk can be done.
Lake Sturgeon
55
The cause-and-effect relationships are represented in the POE diagrams. These diagrams connect development activities that may affect fish habitat to a potential stressor and then to an ultimate effect. The pathways are also connected with areas to which mitigation or compensation can be applied to reduce the effect. Existing DFO Pathways of Effect are presented as a resource in Appendix A and relate primarily to the construction aspects of a project. Many of the POEs are applicable to most general construction activities that would occur in or near water and therefore relate well to waterpower facilities. Furthermore, existing Operational Statements (OS) have been developed by DFO for projects with low risk to fish habitat. Operational Statements that may pertain to waterpower facility construction and operation include (Appendix B):

Each OS provides measures and conditions, which if followed should avoid a HADD (Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction) of fish habitat and thus be in compliance with subsection 35(1) of the Fisheries Act. Proponents are not required to submit their proposal for review by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) when they incorporate the measures and conditions outlined in the OS into their plans. These statements prescribe both the conditions under which the specified project is a low risk to fish habitat and the measures necessary to mitigate potential impacts, by isolating and breaking the pathways of effect that may otherwise lead to negative impacts to fish or fish habitat. Each statement promotes the current best management practices for the activities and considers the sensitivity of the fish habitat as well as the form and function of the receiving water body. Existing Operational Statement are presented in Appendix B. Both of the above noted tools are effective Best Management Practices related to general construction aspects of a waterpower project (i.e., construction in or near water as well as construction of access roads, bridges and the power corridor). Other mitigations for constructing the power corridor and access roads (in addition to the above stated strategies) may involve incorporating natural channel design principles and using enhanced channel stabilization techniques when vegetation is removed or small waterways are re-aligned to permit access. Proper implementation of these strategies will aid in minimizing cumulative impacts to Lake Sturgeon as it relates to the ultimate footprint of a project.
Beaver Dam Removal Bridge Maintenance Clear Span Bridges Culvert Maintenance High Pressure Directional Drilling Ice Bridges and Snow Fills Submerged Log Salvage Routine Maintenance Dredging Isolated or Dry Open-Cut Stream Crossings Overhead Line Construction Isolated pond Construction Punch and Bore Crossings Maintenance of Riparian Vegetation in Existing Rights-of-Way Temporary Stream Crossing Underwater Cables
56
7.13 M13 Natural Channel Design Principles Natural channel design incorporates concepts from fluvial geomorphology and is used to guide channel re-alignments and channel restoration. Common impacts of hydro projects include changes of the natural sediment transport of a riverian system, changes in water energy gradient distribution, and changes in channel forming flows with storage and release of water to generate power. Natural channel design principles are used for downstream channel modifications to keep the river flow energy and sediment transport regime in balance to maintain existing downstream habitat. Some issues related to implementing natural channel design principles at high head facilities is sometimes challenging due to conflicts with flood management in spillways or a loss of head. For these reasons, incorporating such principles may be more successful at low head facilities (Pope pers. Comm., 2009). Incorporation of natural channel design principles within spillways, diversion channels, minor stream re-alignments etc. is usually associated with components of a compensation strategy or habitat enhancement. This approach incorporates the natural geomorphological structure of the stream to provide the framework to support a range of self-sustaining terrestrial and aquatic habitats. Thus the incorporation of these principles is considered a Best Management Practice for mitigating and compensating for impacts to Lake Sturgeon. It is noted in the literature regarding Lake Sturgeon that the most successful channel design programs are constructed to adapt to variable flow conditions and accommodate minimal flow requirements (Fortin et al. 2002), thus providing critical habitat (i.e., migration, spawning, feeding, over wintering) for Lake Sturgeon throughout all flow conditions. Literature and case studies cited in regards to natural channel design and habitat enhancement are noted in Section 8.20 and annotated in Appendix C.
7.14 M14 Enhanced Channel Stabilization Techniques Enhanced habitat function can be achieved when natural channel design principles and enhanced channel stabilization techniques are incorporated into the design principles within spillways, diversion channels, minor stream re-alignments etc. and are usually associated with components of a compensation strategy or habitat enhancement. Placement of appropriately sized materials can also provide channel stability and reduce erosion associated with variable flow conditions. Thus the incorporation of enhanced channel stabilization techniques using natural channel design principles is considered a Best Management Practice for mitigating and compensating for impacts to Lake Sturgeon. Literature and case studies cited in regards to enhanced channel stabilization techniques and habitat enhancement are noted in Section 8.20 and annotated in Appendix C.
7.15 M15 Fisheries Management Plans This BMP Guide focuses on Lake Sturgeon, for which recovery strategies and management plans are under development. The development of recovery strategies and management plans for Species at Risk are a requirement under both SARA and ESA and each plan will identify recovery targets for distribution and abundance as well as known threats etc. These recovery targets generally include specific objectives and direction for implementation such as habitat creation, enhancement and selective harvest of non-target species. Co-operative partnership with resource managers to implement and advance these types of objectives is therefore seen as a Best Management Practice in mitigating and enhancing the Lake Sturgeon resource when developing or operating waterpower facilities. For example, one case study notes the active management for desired species (selective harvest) as a form of mitigating impacts to reservoir
Lake Sturgeon
57
creation and impoundments at waterpower facilities (Hayeur, 2001). This reference is provided in annotated form in Appendix C. Hayeur, Gaetan. 2001: Summary of Knowledge Acquired in Northern Environments from 1970-2000. Montreal: Hydro-Quebec.
7.16 M16 Design/Re-design of Outlet Structures The design/redesign of outlet structures within spillways and tailraces is a form of mitigation that can be employed at both the planning stage and post construction of a facility. As noted in Section 9, Table 2, the implementation costs of these types of mitigations vary greatly between new developments and existing facilities. A number of publications summarizing available technologies to date and cost benefits with regards to spillway design and fish protection including: Environmental Mitigations at Hydroelectric Projects. 1994: Volume II. Benefits and Costs of Fish Passage and Protection. Fish Passage Technologies: Protection at Hydropwer Facilities, OTAENV-641 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1995. The above noted resources provide a broad range of mitigation strategies and construction design options for limiting impacts on fish at waterpower facilities. Specific references in the literature have noted the consistent detriment of bottom draw spill gates (Sheehan, 2001). These spill gates are often designed to draw from the hypolimnetic layer of the upstream reservoir and as such, impact benthic oriented fish species such as Lake Sturgeon.
Currently, some industry initiatives are investigating the mitigative potential of implementing spill gate designs that are wider than typical gates and of lower height. Furthermore, initiatives exploring the potential for drawing water from the metalimnion layer of the reservoir are also being explored. The hypothesis for such designs are to determine whether suction flow within the reservoir may be concentrated within the metalimnion layer rather than the hypolimnion layer to avoid impacts to benthic oriented fish. Thermal effects to the aquatic environment downstream related to such designs are also taken into consideration. Selection of the most appropriate design for optimal fish protection and mitigation however, is highly site specific and cannot be prescribed without specific site level details associated with a waterpower facility. These types and details and contexts are highly variable and cannot be prescribed within the context of this BMP Guide.
7.17 M17 Mercury Accumulation (Bioconcentration) Control Measure As noted in Section 6.3, literature to date notes the elevations in mercury concentrations within impounded reservoirs is the result of the production of methylmercury in response to the flooding of terrestrial organics (Hayeur 2001). Variations in water levels and reservoir impoundments have been attributed to increases in mercury methylation, an effect that may last up to 20 30 years after the initial impoundment (Rosenberg et al. 1997; Hydro Quebec, 2001). The uptake of mercury in the food-chain is bio-accumulating with greatest accumulation occurring within piscivorous fish (Hydro-Quebec, 2001). There are some references in the literature noting mercury body burden in White Sturgeon being linked to poor reproductive physiology, growth and condition (Fiest et al. 2005). Regarding Lake Sturgeon however, one study noted no detectable relationship between mercury body burden and growth or condition in lake Sturgeon on the Ottawa River (Haxton and Findlay, 2007).
58
The quantity of methylmercury produced is primarily dependant on the size of the floodzone and water residence time within the reservoir (Brouard et al., 1990; Jones et al., 1986; Doyon et al., 1996). In addition, observed extent and rate of increase of mercury concentrations in fish was positively correlated with the decomposition of organic matter during the first years of impoundment (Messier et al. 1985). Thus an effective mitigation measure for minimizing mercury accumulation in small reservoirs may include brush and scrub removal along the proposed shorelines prior to flooding (Tecsult pers. comm., 2008). As water residence time in reservoirs appears correlated to mercury accumulation, the potential to reduce mercury accumulation may be investigated through effective development, implementation and utilization of a water management (i.e., emulated natural flow conditions). Specific references to mercury accumulation monitoring and case studies are included in Appendix C as follows: Hayeur, Gaetan. 2001: Summary of Knowledge Acquired in Northern Environments from 1970-2000. Montreal: Hydro-Quebec. Messier, D., Roy, D., and Lemire, R. 1985: Rseau de surveillance cologique du Complexe La Grande 1978-1984: volution du mercure dans la chair des poissons. Socit dnergie de la Baie James, Montral, QC. xi + 170 p. + apps. Ontario Hydro. 1990: Hydroelectric generating station extensions Mattagami River environmental assessment. Ontario Hydro, Toronto, ON. Various pagination.
7.18 C1 Stock Specific Hatchery Programs Stock specific hatchery (streamside or off-site) programs are noted in the literature as a viable Best Management Practice for compensating impacts to Lake Sturgeon from waterpower development and operation (Auer, 2008; Branchaud et al. 1996). Studies such as Branchaud (1996) were conducted to evaluate the feasibility of using artificial spawning techniques in remote locations, the premise of which is transferable to a waterpower context. The study noted relative success in inducing final maturation in Lake Sturgeon through injecting carp pituitary extract (CPE). The results were fertilization rates between 70% - 89% with hatching occurring an average of six days after fertilization. The implications of such a study may promote increased larval:egg survival ratios and therefore may lend to successful stocking programs as a form of compensation for impacts related to waterpower development and operation. Further to this, a second study investigation the viability of streamside culturing of Lake Sturgeon has also been discussed in the grey literature (Auer, 2006-2008), the results of which have not yet been noted. Due to the increased concern of stocked Lake Sturgeon migrated to native streams and genetically mixing with native stocks, the prospect of rearing cultured Lake Sturgeon within stream side hatcheries to promote imprinting on distinct rivers is discussed (Auer, 2008). The implications of this study are important toward the management and recovery of the species, the premise of which is transferable to waterpower projects where impacts on Lake Sturgeon larvae:egg survival may be anticipated or observed. These types of studies, if proven successful, may lend to promoting stocking as a form of compensation for impacts related to waterpower development and operation. The literature noted that with carefully controlled environmental conditions in the hatchery, first-year survival of raised fry is higher than what is typically observed in the wild (Peterson et al. 2007).
Lake Sturgeon
59
One manual for Lake Sturgeon culture is also cited in Appendix C as follows: Environmental Applications Group Limited. 1988a: Lake sturgeon culture techniques manual. Prepared for Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Northern Region, South Porcupine, ON. 108 p. This manual contains information considered to be pertinent to the aquaculture of Lake Sturgeon. The manual systematically discusses methods of sperm and egg collection, fertilization procedures and other culturing techniques such as the rearing and feeding of hatched sturgeon. Further to this, potential problems associated with bacterial and fungal pathogens are also discussed as well as various designs and costs for constructing and operating a hatchery. Further literature and case studies related to the culturing and stocking of Lake Sturgeon are cited and annotated in Appendix C as follows: Auer, N.A. (ed.) 2003: A Lake Sturgeon rehabilitation plan for Lake Superior. Beamesderfer, R.C.P., and R.A. Farr. 1997: Alternatives for the protection and restoration of sturgeons and their habitat. Boumhounan Committee. 2005b: Boumhounan News Flash. Eastmain-1-A Powerhouse and Rupert Division. Branchaud, A., A.D. Gendron, C. Lemire, and R. Dion, R. 1996: Artificial spawning of Lake Sturgeon in northern Qubec. Chiotti, J.A., M.J. Holtgren, N.A. Auer, S.A. Ogren,. 2008: Lake Sturgeon Spawning Habitat in the Big Manistee River, Michigan.
Graham, K. 1984c: Reintroduction of Lake Sturgeon in Missouri. Hayeur, Gaetan. 2001: Summary of Knowledge Acquired in Northern Environments from 1970-2000. Montreal: Hydro-Quebec. Holtgren, M., S. Ogren, J. Baumann, S. Fajfer, and A. Paquete. 2005: Implementation of a streamside-rearing facility for sturgeon rehabilitation. Peake, S. 1999: Substrate preferences of juvenile hatchery-reared Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens. Stone, L. 1901: Sturgeon hatching in the Lake Champlain basin.
7.19 C2 Habitat Creation and Enhancement Programs In response to habitat loss, degradation or destruction from a new or existing waterpower facility, the creation and or enhancement of habitat has been noted as a viable Best Management Practice for compensation throughout the literature (GDG Conseil Inc, 2001a; Dubuc et al. 1996 and 1997). One such case study from Riviere des Prairie in Quebec noted the restoration and enhancement of Lake Sturgeon habitat within a dam spillway as compensation for habitat loss of the project. The evaluation of the effectiveness of the spawning habitat was undertaken by Dubuc et al., (1996) and first focussed on identifying the areas within the spillway where concentrations of Lake Sturgeon were highest during spawning activity. This area was later identified as degraded and subsequently enhanced between spawning seasons in 1994/1995. A spawning assessment study was undertaken in 1995 and concluded that approximately 1,235,000 larval Lake Sturgeon hatched from the enhanced spawning grounds representing a larvae:egg survival ratio of 0.46% - 0.62%. This survival rate was
60
the same magnitude observed in 1995 (0.67%) when spawning took place on what was deemed lesser quality habitat. This study was repeated again in 1997 (Dubuc et al., 1997) and found that fish were associating more with the new spawning ground than the previous year (1996). It was determined that fewer fish spawned in 1997 compared with the previous two years and thus, a lower catch-per-unit-effort and egg count totals were noted. However, it is interesting to note that, the estimated larval abundance in 1997 was 6.3 million which represented a dramatic increase in larvae:egg ratio survival from the previous two years (Dubuc et al., 1997). A second case study of habitat creation and Lake Sturgeon culture was conducted by Environnement Illimit (2004) at the Eastmain-1 generating station on the Eastmain River, upstream from the Opinaca reservoir (James Bay). One of the potential impacts of the project was the loss of an 890 m2 Lake Sturgeon spawning site within the Eastmain River due to decreased water levels. To compensate for the loss of spawning habitat, three artificial spawning grounds were constructed at separate locations. These three sites were strategically placed as being the only rapids accessible for Lake Sturgeon once water levels decreased during operation. In addition to habitat creation, until natural production and use of the constructed spawning habitat was/is confirmed, a stocking program involving the removal of fertilized eggs, incubation and subsequent release of approximately 60,000 alevins per year was/is also being undertaken. Furthermore, suspected increases in turbidity downstream of the facility through increased erosion were also anticipated to affect overwintering habitat for Lake Sturgeon. In response to the increase in turbidity, water quality was/is constantly monitored and large stones were placed within the river to ensure higher water levels and overwintering habitat were maintained.
Finally, a study by Bruch (1998) attributes the successful recovery of Lake Sturgeon in the Lake Winnebago System (Wisconsin) to the construction of 40 spawning sites throughout its native range. These types of studies lend to the suggestion that Lake Sturgeon have positive responses to habitat creation/enhancement programs and as such, may be used as a form of compensation to minimize impacts on Lake Sturgeon related to waterpower facilities. A series of literature and case studies citing both the successes and failures of habitat creation and enhancement are provided below and are fully annotated in Appendix C. In addition, associated costs are also provided where possible. Alliance Environment, 2002: Restoration of habitats favourable for the reproduction of the Lake Sturgeon in the Saint-Franois river-sector of Drummondville Utilization of the arranged spawning grounds spring 2002. Boumhounan Committee. 2005a: Boumhounan News Flash. Eastmain-1-A Powerhouse and Rupert Division. Breining, G. 2003: Rapid changes on the Red River. Bruch, R.M. 1998: Management and trade of Lake Sturgeon in North America. Dubuc, N., S. Thibodeau, and R. Fortin, R. 1997: Impact de lamnagement dun nouveau secteur de frayre sur lutilisation du milieu en priode de fraie et le succs de reproduction de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) la frayre de la rivire des Prairies au printemps de 1997.
Lake Sturgeon
61
Dubuc, N., S. Thibodeau, J. DesLandes and r. Fortin, R. 1996: Utilisation du milieu en priode de fraie abundance des gniteurs et succs de reproduction de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) la frayre de la rivire des Prairies au printemps de 1996. Environnement Illimit inc. 1994: Centrale Les Cdres Nouvel amnagement phase 2 tudes environnementales. Concepts damnagement de frayres esturgeon jaune et douvrages de montaison. Environnement Illimit inc. 2004a: Amnagement hydrolectrique de lEastmain-1 Esturgeon jaune tude dimpact et amnagements. Version finale. Faucher, R. 1999: Projet de rfection de la centrale La Gabelle Amnagement dune frayre pour lesturgeon jaune. Bilan des travaux 1999. Faucher, R. et M. Abbott, 2001: Restauration dhabitats propices la reproduction de lesturgeon jaunedans la rivire Saint-Franois secteur de Drummondville Bilan des travaux 1999-2001. Fortin, R., J. DAmours and S. Thibodeau. 2002: Effets de lamenagment dun nouveau secteur de frayre sur lutilisation du milieu en priode de fraie et sur le succs de reproduction de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) la frayre de la rivire des Prairies. GDG Conseil inc. 2001a: Rfection de la centrale de La Gabelle. Programme de surveillance et de suivi environnemental. Utilisation par les poissons dun nouveau secteur de fraie amnag en aval de la centrale de La Gabelle printemps 2001.
GDG Conseil inc. 2001b: Rfection de la centrale de La Gabelle. Programme de surveillance et de suivi environnemental. Utilisation par lesturgeon jaune dun nouveau secteur de fraie amnag en aval de la centrale de La Gabelle printemps 2000. Gendron, M., P. Lafrance and M. Lahaye. 2002: Suivi de la frayr amnage en aval de la centrale de Beauharnois printemps 2002. LaHaye, M. 1992: Comparaison de la biologie et de lcologie des jeunes stades de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) dans les rivires des Prairies et LAssomption, prs de Montral. LaHaye, M. 1992: Comparaison de la biologie et de lcologie des jeunes stades de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) dans les rivires des Prairies et LAssomption, prs de Montral. LaHaye, M., A. Branchaud, M. Gendron, R. Verdon and R. Fortin, R. 1992: Reproduction, early life history, and characteristics of the spawning grounds of the Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in Des Prairies and LAssomption Rivers near Montral, Qubec. LaHaye, M., and M. Gendron, M. 1994: Reproduction de lesturgeon jaune, bief daval de Pointe-des-Cascades et de Beauharnois. Thibodeau, S., J. DAmours and R. Fortin1999: Impact de lamnagement dun nouveau secteur de frayre sur lutilisation du milieu en priode de frai et le succs de reproduction de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) la frayre de la rivire des Prairies au printemps de 1999.
62
Thibodeau, S.,J. DAmours and R. Fortin. 1998: Impact de lamnagement dun nouveau secteur de frayre sur lutilisation du milieu en priode de frai et le succs de reproduction de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) la frayre de la rivire des Prairies au printemps de 1998. Verdon, R., and M. Gendron. 1991: Creation of artificial spawning grounds downstream of the Riviere-des-Prairies Spillway.
Lake Sturgeon
63
8.0 Cumulative Effects /Impacts for Proposed and Modified Facilities

Most regulatory agencies base their decision on the extent to which a facility impacts a fisheries resource by how many fish (or species) are affected. While this broad based approach is suitable for population management or risk assessment; the literature shows that the overall impacts of a waterpower facility are less predictable and more complex than simple changes in numbers of fish. Decisions regarding the impacts of constructing, modifying or operating a waterpower facility often involve relying on the assessment of the overall impact of the facility on the fisheries resource. In the case of this Best Management Practices Guide, the collective contribution of various components of a waterpower project or operation is referred to as the projects overall impact on the sturgeon resource. At the project or site level, overall impacts refer to the additive or subtractive effects of various components such as turbine design, turbine operation (efficiency) and water management/use on the overall net effect of that project on the sturgeon resource. At the operations level however, impacts stemming from the synergies and antagonisms between several projects along a regulated system are referred to as the cumulative impacts of a project. At this level, cumulative impacts arise from how one waterpower operation directly and indirectly relates to impacts from other operations on the same system. In this way, site/project level impacts will also apply to a larger geographic area on the operations level and contribute to the identification of cumulative impacts. For the purposes of this Best Management Practices Guide, cumulative impacts are discussed in relation to the sturgeon resource. The identification of cumulative impacts first requires an understanding of the sturgeon resource within a particular river system, or watershed basin, and all the various ways a series of projects can cause impacts. At the project or site specific level, the most effective way to do this is to apply the Pathways of Effect for sturgeon contained in this guide. These pathways will identify the major areas of impact and provide guidelines for mitigating or compensating those impacts at each step. In many cases the impacts associated with various components of the project will have a common mitigation strategy. In these instances applying the appropriate mitigation is a cost effective resolution. In other instances the impacts and subsequent management strategies at the project/site level are less predictable and more complex. These cases are those considered to be project specific and require focused investigation. The identification of such impacts may still require additional avoidance, mitigation or compensation strategies not identified through this Best Management Practices Guide as they require specific engineering and consulting input to understand and mitigate. They can, nonetheless, have significant impacts to the overall net effect of the project and must be addressed in the planning and design stage of a projects development or upgrade. At the operations level, cumulative impacts can be more difficult to identify because: a) facilities may have different owners and information about specific project impacts may not be readily available; b) the impacts of specific projects may not be fully understood (studies ongoing or absent) at the time of new project design or existing project upgrade; c) understanding cumulative impacts at the river or watershed level requires co-ordination of funds and responsibility between facility owners and proponents not easy to negotiate; and perhaps may be handled by the Crown as a part of waterpower planning allocation exercise. d) cumulative impacts often require datasets to be compiled from multiple years to capture natural variations in temperature, hydrology, and population dynamics in order to accurately capture the net effects of the multiple operations.
Lake Sturgeon
65
Despite these hindrances, the identification of cumulative effects must be addressed in the planning and design stage of a project (as per the requirements under CEAA) and should be consistently revised during the long term monitoring of any waterpower facility.
66
9.0 Feasibility of Implementation
Implementing avoidance, mitigation and protection measures for Lake Sturgeon should be considered an important cost of any project proposal. The actual costs of implementing appropriate avoidance, mitigation and compensation strategies will depend on the following criteria.
Type of Project Hydroelectric projects can be either Greenfield installations, i.e., new installations in an area where no hydroelectric project existed previously, or project upgrades and expansions. Greenfield projects generally have the greatest economic advantages for incorporating mitigation or compensation since required measures can be addressed at the project design and operational (financial) commitment level. Existing facility upgrades or expansions typically incur higher economic liabilities since mitigation and compensation often involves retrofit of existing design, and some amount of operational slow-down or shutdown, and dismantling of existing facilities to undertake renovations to accommodate new designs. In some cases, implementing mitigation and compensation in existing sites will require extensive structural integrity assessments, re-engineering or redesign of existing facility components such as dams and turbines.
acknowledged as minimal). However, maintaining specific flows to ensure no impact to sturgeon will occur over the life of the project and depending on the type of facility and seasonal water availability these costs will not only be variable from year to year but may also increase over the life of the project as utility base rates rise since lost water is lost revenue. In some cases, mitigation strategies may be effective at addressing multiple impacts. Understanding the costs of any mitigation strategy prior to detailed impact assessment will be difficult. Consequently, it is not always clear what approach is best to effectively deal with the impact, and at what stage in the Conceptual Process (Figure 3) mitigation should be considered or pursued. To assist in a general understanding, Table 2 identifies the relative costs for greenfield and modified existing facilities relative to the Conceptual Process (Figure 3).
Table 2. Relative Costs of Implementing

BMPs during Planning, Avoidance and Redesign Phases of Projects Greenfield and Existing Upgrade Developments
Conceptual Process Stage
Greenfield
Modified Existing
Type, Magnitude and Duration of Expected Impact Impacts to sturgeon can be numerous, and long term (blockage to migration, long term effects of seasonal spill) or short term (occasional spill); acute (short term change in base temperature due to spill) or chronic (bioaccumulation of mercury) (Reeves and Bunch 1993., Headon and Pope 1990). Consequently mitigating these impacts will have vastly different economic requirements. For example, providing upstream and downstream passage requires a one-time up front cost of designing and building fish passage structures (maintenance costs
Planning Avoidance Redesign Mitigation Compensation
Low Low/Moderate Moderate Moderate
Low/Moderate Moderate Moderate/High Moderate/High
Moderate/High High
Lake Sturgeon
67
For both Greenfield and Existing facilities, addressing mitigation and compensation through planning is the most feasible since required changes can be incorporated into the final project design. Avoiding impacts once a project is designed or planned carries a higher cost and will be less feasible since it requires reconsideration of the project location, design or operation. Redesign of a potential project carries the highest cost since it requires additional allocation of engineering, economic, environmental and planning resources to address the problem at hand. Implementing mitigation at the re-design stage is still feasible but costly. Implementation of mitigation measures at existing facility expansions or upgrades will generally be less feasible and more costly than Greenfield installation because of the need to re-engineer existing structural components, re-negotiate pre-existing approvals (may not be possible), and develop new or renegotiate partnerships with stakeholders. In consideration of the above, the cost and subsequent feasibility of any hydroelectric project depends directly on an assessment of the actual costs to achieve no net effect to sturgeon relative to the expected return on investment, assuming the required mitigation adequately addresses the impacts to sturgeon and satisfies DFO requirements under the Fisheries Act.
68
10.0 Retrospective
This project undertaking was performed under the guidance of the Ontario Waterpower Association and acknowledges the contribution of the Class Environmental Assessment for Waterpower Projects as a contributor to this document. Further acknowledgement to the project steering committee is noted. Steering Committee

The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions from those who attended the December 17-18, 2008 Lake Sturgeon Workshop in Trois-Rivires, Quebec and the January 26, 2009 Lake Sturgeon Workshop in Markham, Ontario. The authors would also like to acknowledge the contributions from the following groups and individuals that served as resource contacts, advisors and peer reviewers on this project. Contributors

Paul Norris President, Ontario Waterpower Association Colin Hoag Ontario Waterpower Association Peter Carter Ministry of Natural Resources Tim Haxton Ministry of Natural Resources Debbie Ming Fisheries and Oceans Canada Dave Stanley Ontario Power Generation
Fisheries and Oceans Canada Ontario-Great Lakes Area Hydro Quebec Manitoba Hydro Michael Power University of Waterloo Ministry of Natural Resources Ontario Power Generation Ontario Waterpower Association Tecsult AECOM Canada Queens University Research Group
Lake Sturgeon
69
11. References
Auer, N. 1996: Importance of habitat and migration to sturgeons with emphasis on Lake Sturgeon. Canadian. Auer, N.A. 1982: Identification of larval fishes of the Great Lakes Basin with emphasis on the lake Michigan Drainage. Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, Special Pub. 82-3: 744pp. Auer, N.A. and E.A. Baker. 2002: Duration and drift of larval Lake Sturgeon in the Sturgeon River, Michigan. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 18: 557-564. Auer, N.A., 1999a: Lake Sturgeon: a unique and imperilled species in the Great Lakes, p. 515-536. In W.W. Taylor and C.P. Ferreri (ed.) Great Lakes fisheries policy and management: A binational perspective. Michigan State University Press, East Lansing, MI. Auer, N.A., 1999b: Population characteristics and movements of Lake Sturgeon in the Sturgeon River and Lake Superior. J. Gt. Lakes Res. 25: 282-293. Auer, N.A., 2006-2008: Streamside Lake Sturgeon Culture for the Ontonagon River, Michigan. Unpublished study to date. Baker, E.A. and D.J. Borgeson. 1999: Lake Sturgeon abundance and harvest in Black Lake, Michigan, 1975-1999. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 19: 1080-1088. Baxter, R.M. 1977: Environmental effects of dams and impoundments in Canada: experience and prospects. Canadian Bulletin of Fisheries Aquatic Science 205: 34 p. Baxter, R.M. and P. Glaude. 1980: Environmental effects of dams and impoundments in Canada: experience and prospects.
Beamesderfer, R.C.P. and R.A. Farr. 1997: Alternatives for the protection and restoration of sturgeons and their habitat. Environmental Biology of Fishes 48: 407-417. Bemis, W.E. and E.K. Findeis, 1994: The sturgeons plight. Nature 370: 602. Benz, and C.M. Hoover (eds). Caviar and conservation: Status, management and trade of North American sturgeon and paddlefish. TRAFFIC North America Washington D.C. World Wildlife Fund. Bethesda, M.D. Characteristics of spawning grounds of the Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in Des Prairies and LAssomption rivers, near Montreal, Quebec. Canadian Journal of Zoology 70: 1681-1689. 42 pp. Billard, R. and G. Lecointre. 2001: Biology and conservation of sturgeon and paddlefish. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 10: 355-392. Branchaud, A., A.D. Gendron, C. Lemire and R. Dion, 1996: Artificial spawning of Lake Sturgeon in northern Qubec. Final report on spring 1995 research presented to the James Bay Mercury Committee, Montral, Qubec. v + 24 p. Breining, G., 2003: Rapid changes on the Red River. Minnesota Conservation Volunteer November-December: 45-51. Brouard, D., D. Demers, R. Lalumiere, R. Schetagne and R. Verdon. 1990: Summary Report: Evolution of Mercury Levels in Fish of the La Grande Hydroelectric Complex, Quebec (1978-1989). Report by Groupe Environment Shooner Inc. for Vice-preseidance Envrionnement, Hydro-Quebec.
Lake Sturgeon
71
Brousseau, C.S. 1987: The Lake Sturgeon in Ontario. Pages 2-9 in C.H. Olver, editor. Proceedings of a Workshop on the Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens). Ontario Fisheries Technical Report No. 23. Brousseau, C.S. and G.A. Goodchild, 1989: Fisheries and yields in the Moose River basin, Ontario, p. 145-158. In D.P. Dodge (ed.) Proceedings of the International Large River Symposium (LARS), Honey Harbour, Ontario, Sept. 14-21, 1986. Can. Spec. Publ. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 106. Bruch, R.M. 1998: Management and trade of Lake Sturgeon in North America. In: Williamson, D.F.G., G. Benz, and C.M. Hoover (eds). Caviar and conservation: Status, management and trade of North American sturgeon and paddlefish. TRAFFIC North America Washington D.C. World Wildlife Fund. Bruch, R.M. and F.P. Binkowski, 2002: Spawning behavior of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens). J. Appl. Ichthyol. 18: 570-579. Cada, G. 1998: Efforts to reduce the impacts of hydroelectric power production on reservoir fisheries in the United States. International Review of Hydrobiology 83: 43-50. Cada, G.F. 2001: The development of advanced hydroelectric turbines to improve fish passage survival. Fisheries 26. pg 14-23. Cado, G.F., L.A. Garrison and R.K. Fisher Jr., 2007: Determining the Effects of Shear Stress on Fish Mortality during Turbine Passage. Hydro Review. Carson, R.K., A.P. Sandilands and R.R. Evans, 1991: Hydroelectric Generating Station Extansions Mattagami River. Mattagami River Hydraulic Studies and Impacts on Fisheries Habitat. NEPG Records Management Report # 90367 Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2005.
COSEWIC species assessments (short version), May 2005. COSEWIC. 4 p. Available from http://www. cosewic.gc.ca/rpts/Short_Species_A ssessment_e.pdf [accessed 30 March 2006]. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2006: Lake Sturgeon Status Assessment Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 1986: Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat. Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Ottawa, Ontario. DesLandes, J., S. Gunette and R. Fortin, 1994: Evolution of fish communities in environments affected by the development of the La Grande Complex, phase I (1977-1992). Hydro-Qubec and the Universit du Qubec a Montral. 85 p. + map. Dick, T.A. and B. MacBeth, 2003: First Nations participation in determining the status of a species at risk, p. 291-300. In J. Oakes, R. Riewe, K. Wilde, A. Edmunds and A. Dubois (ed.) Native Voices in Research. Department of Zoology, Faculty of Environment and Faculty of Graduate Studies, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba. Doyon, J.-F., A. Tremblay and M. Proulx. 1996: Regime alimentaire des poissons du complexe La Grande et teneurs en mercure dans leurs proies (1993-1994). Hydro-Quebec document. Dubuc, N., S. Thibodeau and R. Fortin, 1997: Impact de lamnagement dun nouveau secteur de frayre sur lutilisation du milieu en priode de fraie et le succs de reproduction de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) la frayre de la rivire des Prairies au printemps de 1997. Rapport prpar pour la Direction Production, Beauharnois-Gatineau, Hydro- Qubec. Universit du Qubec Montral, Dpartement des sciences biologiques. xiv + 81 p. + apps.
72
Dubuc, N., S. Thibodeau, J. DesLandes and R. Fortin, 1996: Utilisation du milieu en priode de fraie abundance des gniteurs et succs de reproduction de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) la frayre de la rivire des Prairies au printemps de 1996. Rapport prpar pour le Module Environment, Services Techniques, Rgion Maisonneuve et pour la Vice-prsidence Environnement, Hydro-Qubec. Universit du Quebc Montral, Dpartement des sciences biologiques. ix + 91 p. Dumont, P., J. Leclerc, S. Desloges, P. Bilodeau, Y. Mailhot, P. Brodeur, R. Dumas, M. Mingelbier, R. Verdon, M. La Haye, J. Morin and R. Fortin, 2006: The biology, status and management of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the Qubec part of the St. Lawrence River: a summary. Presented at the Lake Sturgeon Recovery Planning Workshop, February 28 - March 2, 2006, Winnipeg, MB. 11 p. Ead, S.A., C. Katopodis, G.J. Sikora and N. Rajaratnam, 2004: Flow regimes and structure in pool and weir fishways. J. Environ. Eng. Sci. 3: 379-390. Electric Power Research Institute, 2008: Fish Friendly Hydropower Turbine Development and Deployment: Phase II. Project Data Sheet. Environnement Illimit inc. 1994: Centrale Les Cdres Nouvel amnagement phase 2 tudes environnementales. Concepts damnagement de frayres esturgeon jaune et douvrages de montaison. Report prepared for Hydro-Qubec, Montral, QC. ix + 98 p. + apps. Environnement Illimit inc. 2004a: Amnagement hydrolectrique de lEastmain-1 Esturgeon jaune tude dimpact et amnagements. Version finale. Prsent Hydro-Qubec, Montral, QC. iv + 32 p. Evaluation of an Angled Louver Facility for Guiding Sturgeon to a Downstream Bypass. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, Holyoke Gas & Electric Company, Holyoke, MA, and WE-Energies Inc., Milwaukee, WI: 2006. 1011786.
EPRI. 2008: Fish Friendly Hydropower Turbine Development and Dpeloyment: Phase II. Electric Power Research Institute. Palo Alta, CA. Evans, R.R., B.J. Parker and B.J. McCormick, 1993: Strategy assessment sturgeon stranding in Adam Creek. Ontario Hydro, Northern Development Department Report No. 935013: iv + 14 p. Faucher, R. 1999: Projet de rfection de la centrale La Gabelle Amnagement dune frayre pour lesturgeon jaune. Bilan des travaux 1999. Rapport prsent HydroQubec par GDG Conseil inc., Montral, Qubec. i + 10 p. + apps. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 1999: Relicensing the Holyoke Hydroelectriuc Project on the Conneticut River (FERC Project Numbers 2004-073 and 11607-000); Franklin, Hampden and Hampshire, Massachusetts. EPA number: 990263, 774 pages and Maps. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 2007: Spokane River and Post Falls Hydroelectric Project, Kootenai and Benewah Counties, Idaho and Spokane, Lincoln, and Stevens Counties, Washington (FERC Project Nos. 2545 and 12606). Feist, G.W., M.A.H. Webb, D.T. Gundersen, E.P. Foster, C.B. Schreck, A.G. Moule and M.S. Fitzpatrick. 2005: Evidence of detrimental effects of environmental contaminants on growth and reproductive physiology of white sturgeon in impounded areas of the Columbia River. Environmental Health Perspectives 113: 1675-1682. Ferguson, M.M., and Duckworth, G.A. 1997: The status and distribution of Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens, in the Canadian provinces of Manitoba, Ontario and Qubec: a genetic perspective. Environ. Biol. Fishes 48: 299-309.
Lake Sturgeon
73
Fernndez-Pasquier, V. 1999: Acipenser sturio L. in the Guadalquivir River, Spain. Water regulation as factors in stock decline from 1932 to 1967. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 15: 133-135. Findlay, C.S., Lagarec, D., McGillivary, R., Houlahan, J., and Sawada, M. [1994?]: An assessment of the risks to Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the vicinity of The Pas, Manitoba. Preliminary Interim Report. University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON. 21 p. + app. Fish Passage Technologies: Protection at Hydropwer Facilities, OTA-ENV-641 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1995). Fortin, R., DAmours, J., and Thibodeau, S. 2002: Effets de lamenagment dun nouveau secteur de frayre sur lutilisation du milieu en priode de fraie et sur le succs de reproduction de lesturgeon jaune (Acipenser fulvescens) la frayre de la rivire des Prairies. Rapport synthse 1995-1999. Pour lUnit Hydraulique et Environnement, Hydro-Qubec et la Socit de la faune du Qubec, Direction de lamnagement de la faune de Montral, de Laval et de la Montrgie. Dpartement des Sciences biologiques, Universit du Qubec Montral. xiv + 131 p. + map. Friday, M.J. 2008: Personal communication regarding habitat loss and fragmentation of Lake Sturgeon in Lake Superior tributaries. Friedl, G. and A. Wuest. 2002: Disrupting the biochemical cycles consequences of damming. Aquatic Sciences 64: 55-65. GDG Conseil inc. 2001a: Rfection de la centrale de La Gabelle. Programme de surveillance et de suivi environnemental. Utilisation par les poissons dun nouveau secteur de
fraie amnag en aval de la centrale de La Gabelle printemps 2001. Rapport prsent Hydro-Qubec, vice-prsidence Exploitation des quipments de production, Unit Hydraulique et Environnement, Montral, Qubec. vi + 29 p. + apps. Greig, L.A., L.P. Rattie, R.R. Everitt, and M.L. Jones. 1986: Potenitial Environmental Effects of the Proposed Mattagami Hydroelectric Extension Project. ESSA Environmental and Social Systems Analysts Ltd. Guay, G., and Gendron, M. 2004: Suivi de lutilisation du bassin de Pointe-desCascades par lesturgeon jaune et les autres espces - 2004. Rapport dEnvironnement Illimit inc. pour Hydro-Qubec, Production Barrages et environnement, unit Environnement, Montral, Qubec. viii + 43 p. + apps. Harkness, W.J.K. and J.R. Dymond. 1961: The Lake Sturgeon. The history and problems of conservation. Ontario Department of Lands and Forests, Fish and Wildlife Branch, Toronto. Haxton T. 2009: Personal Communications related to juvenile recruitment within head ponds / reservoirs. Haxton, T.J, and Findlay, S.C. 2007: Variation in Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) abundance and growth among river reaches in a large regulated river. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 65: 645-657. Haxton, T. 2007: Impacts of waterpower management on select fish in the Ottawa River, Canada, with an emphasis on Lake Sturgeon. Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies University of Ottawa Headon, C.M., and Pope, F.M. 1990: Heavy metals program, mercury in reservoirs cumulative impact of mercury contamination of fish in the Moose River system: a review of MOE data. Ontario Hydro, Environmental Studies and Assessments Department Technical Memorandum 90/4: Pagination unknown.
74
Hickey, S. Chernyk, R. Haas and M. Thomas. 2003: Assessment of Lake Sturgeon 252 (Acipenser fulvescens) spawning efforts in the lower St. Clair River, Michigan. Journal of Great Lakes Research 29: 383-391. Hilsenhoff, W.L. 1988: Rapid field assessment of organic pollution with a family level biotic index. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 7: 65-68. Houston, J.J. 1987: Status of Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens in Canada. Canadian Field Naturalist 101 (2): 171-185. Jager, H.I and Smith, B.T. 2008: Sustainable Reservoir Operation: Can we Generate Hydropower and Preserve Ecosystem Values? River. Res. Applic. 24: 340-352. Jager, H.I., K. Lepla, J. Chandler, and W. Van Winkle. 2001: A theoretical study of river fragmentation by dams and its effects on other riverine fishes. Environmental Biology of Fishes 60: 347-361. Johnson, J.E. 1987: Protected fishes of the United States and Canada. American Fisheries Society. Jones, M.L., G.L. Cunningham, D.R. Marmorek, C. Wren and D. Degraaf. 1986. Mercury Release in Hydroelectric Reservoirs. Montreal: Canadian Electrical Association. K. McGrath, 2008: Investigation of Lake Sturgeon Spawning Activities at Iroquois Dam on the St. Lawrence River in 2008. Personal communication. Kempinger, J.J. 1988: Spawning and early life history of Lake Sturgeon in the Lake Winnebago system, Wisconsin. American Fisheries Society Symposium 5: 111-122. Killgore, K.J., S.T. Maynord, M.D. Chan and R.P. Morgan II. 2001: Evaluation of Propeller induced mortality on early life stages of selected fish species. N. Am. J. Fish. Manag. 21: 947-955.
Kohlhorst, D.W., L.W. Botsford, J.S. Brennan, and G.M. Cailliet. 1991: Aspects of the structure and dynamics of an exploited central California population of white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus), p. 277-293. In P. Williot (ed.) Acipenser, Actes du Colloque. Premier Colloque International sur lesturgeon. Centre National Machinisme Agricole du Gnie Rural des Eaux et des Forts (CEMAGREF). 3-6 October, 1989, Bordeaux, France. La Gabelle, 1990: G.D.G. Environnement lte, pour la Vice-prsidence Environnement, Hydro-Qubec, Montral, Qubec. xvii + 111 p. + apps. LaHaye, M., Branchaud, A., Gendron, M., Verdon, R., and Fortin, R. 1992: Reproduction, early life history, and characteristics of the spawning grounds of the lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in Des Prairies and LAssomption Rivers near Montral, Qubec. Can. J. Zool. 70: 1681-1689. LaHaye, M., S. Desloges, Cote, C., Deer, J., Philips, S. Jr., Giroux, B., Clermont, S. and Dumont, P. 2003: Location of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) spawning grounds in the upper part of the Lachine Rapids (St. Lawrence River). Lamontagne, D., and Gilbert, L. 1990: tude des frayres du Saint-Maurice en aval de la centrale de La Gabelle, 1990. G.D.G. Environnement lte, pour la Vice-prsidence Environnement, HydroQubec, Montral, Qubec. xvii + 111 p. + apps. Lauer, C. 1988: Identification of critical life history periods of Lake Sturgeon and factors that may affect population survival. Correspondence/Memo to Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Kapuskasing District Manager, Kapuskasing, ON. 9 p. Liu, J.K. and Yu, Z.T. 1992: Water quality changes and effects on fish populations in the Hanjiang River, China, following hydroelectric dam construction. Reg. Riv.: Res. Manage. 7: 359-368.
Lake Sturgeon
75
Lord, K. 2007: Movements and habitat use of juvenile Lake Sturgeon in the north channel of the St. Clair River. M.Sc. Thesis, Natural Resources and Environment, University of Michigan. Manny, B.A. and G.W. Kennedy. 2002: Known Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) spawning habitat in the channel between lakes Huron and Erie in the Laurentian Great Lakes. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 18: 486-490. McKinley, S., Van Der Kraak, G., and Power, G. 1998: Seasonal migrations and reproductive patterns in the Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens, in the vicinity of hydroelectric stations in northern Ontario. Environ. Biol. Fishes 51: 245-256. Messier, D., and Roy, D. 1987: Concentrations en mercure chez les poissons au complexe hydrolectrique de La Grande Rivire (Qubec). Nat. Can. (Qu.) 114: 357-368. Messier, D., Roy, D., and Lemire, R. 1985: Rseau de surveillance cologique du Complexe La Grande 1978-1984: volution du mercure dans la chair des poissons. Socit dnergie de la Baie James, Montral, QC. xi + 170 p. + apps. Milbrink, G. 1983: An Improved Environmental Index Based on the Relative Abundance of Oligochaete Species. Hydrobiologia 102, 89-97. Navarro-Mendoza, D.E. McAllister and J.E. Deacon. 1989: Fishes of North America endangered, threatened, or of special concern: 1989. Fisheries 14: 2-20. Nicols, S.J., G. Kennedy, E. Crawford, J. Allen, J. French III, G. Black, M. Blouin, J. Noakes, D.L.G., F.W.H. Beamish, and A. Rossiter. 1999: Conservation implications of behaviour and growth of the Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvenscens, in nothern Ontario. Environmental Biology of Fishes 55: 135144. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2002: Atlas of Lake Sturgeon Waters in Ontario.
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, 2003: Water Management Planning Aquatic Ecosystem Guidelines (Draft to be replaced by the new LRIA Technical Guidelines). Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2009: Ontario Fishing Regulations. Ontario Power Authority. 2006: Ontarios Integrated Water System Plan Scope and Overview. Ontario Waterpower Association, 2005: Evaluation and Assessment of Ontarios Waterpower Potential Final Report. Ontario Waterpower Association, 2008: The Class Environmental Assessment for Waterpower Projects. Parsley, M.J, and Beckman, L.G. 1994: White sturgeon spawning and rearing habitat in the Lower Columbia River. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 14(4), pp. 812-827. Parsley, M.J., Beckman, L.G., and McCabe, G.T., Jr. 1993: Spawning and rearing habitat use by white sturgeons in the Columbia River downstream from McNary Dam. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 122: 217-222. Peterson, D.L., P.V. Vecsei, and C.A. Jennings. 2007: Ecology and biology of the Lake Sturgeon: a synthesis of current knowledge of a threatened North American Acipenseridae. Review Fish. Biol Fisheries 17: 59-76. Reeves, R.R., and Bunch, J.N. (ed.) 1993: Forum on science and resource-related issues in hydroelectric development. An unpublished report prepared for the Office on Energy Research and Development, Canada, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, Ottawa, Ontario. vi + 37 p. Resh, V.C., M.J. Myers, M.J. Hannaford, 1996: Macroinvertebrates as Biotic Indicators of Environmental Quality Methods in Stream Ecology. Academic Press, Inc.
76
Rosenberg, D.M., F. Berkes, B.A. Bodaly, R.E. Hecky, C.A. Kelly and J.W.M. Rudd. 1997: Large-scale impacts of hydroelectric development. Environmental Review 5: 27-54. Roussow, G. 1957: Some considerations concerning sturgeon spawning periodicity. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 14: 553-572. Rusak, J.A. and T. Mosindy. 1997: Seasonal movements of Lake Sturgeon in Lake of the Woods and the Rainy River, Ontario. Canadian Journal of Zoology 74: 383-397. Sale, M.J., Cada, G.F. and Rinehart, B.E. 1997: Progress report on DOEs advanced hydropower turbine systems program. ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts. Sandilands, A.P. 1987: Biology of the Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the Kenogami River, Ontario. In Threader R.W., Pope R.J. and Schaap P.R.H. 1998: Development of a Habitat Suitability Index Model for Lake Sturgeon. Report No. H-07015.01 0012sdsd. Scott W.B. and E.J. Crossman 1973: Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Fish. Res. Board Canada, Bull. 184. 966 pp. Summer, W., W. Stritzinger, and W. Zhang. 1994: The impact of run-of-river hydropower plants on temporal suspended sediment transport behaviour. Pages 411-419 in Variability in Stream Erosion and Sediment Transport (Proceedings of the Canberra Symposium, December 1994) IAHS Publ. No. 224, 1994. Tecsult. 2007: Project Technical Report on Eastmain River PK 207 Weir construction and Implementation. Tecsult. 2008: Personal communications regarding Lake Sturgeon Project Experience.
Threader R.W., Pope R.J. and Schaap P.R.H. 1998: Development of a Habitat Suitability Index Model for Lake Sturgeon. Report No. H-07015.01 0012. Threader, R.W. and C.S. Brousseau. 1986: Biology and Management of the Lake Sturgeon in the Moose River, Ontario. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 6: 383-390. Thuemler T. 1991: Personal Communications on Lake Sturgeon spawning habitat. Wisconsin Dept. Nat. Res. Vladykov, V.D. 1955: Poissons du Qubec Les esturgeons. Dpartement des Pcheries, Province de Qubec. Album 5. 11 p. Wetzel, R.G. 2001: Limnology: Lake and River Ecosystems. 3rd Ed. Academic Press, London, UK. Williams, J.E., J.E. Johnson, D.A. Hendrickson, S. Contreras-Balderas, J.D. Williams, M. NavarroMendoza., D.E., McAllister., and J.E. Deacon. 1989: Fishes of North America endangered, threatened, or of special concern. Fisheries 14: 2-20. Zhong, Y. and G. Power. 1996: Environmental impacts of hydroelectric projects on fish resources in China. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 12: 81-98.
Lake Sturgeon
77
12. Glossary
Risk Management
The systematic application of management policies, procedures and practices to the tasks of identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating and monitoring risk. A defined channel with bed and banks within which concentrated water flows continuously, frequently or infrequently. A process of identifying and focusing on adverse effects via the physical and biophysical environment. The pathways of effect also provide a focus for the information about the existing environment that need to be collected. A table used to sequentially evaluate the magnitude of each identified risk. Effects that remain after mitigation has been applied. The purpose of the Act is to ensure that projects are considered in a careful manner before federal authorities take action in connection with them, in order that such projects do not cause significant adverse environmental effects. In addition, the Act encourages the promotion of sustainable development in federal decision making, and public participation in the environmental assessment process. The replacement of natural habitat, increase in the productivity of existing habitat, or maintenance of fish production by artificial means in circumstances dictated by social and economic conditions, where mitigation techniques and other measures are not adequate to maintain habitats for Canadas fisheries resources. The planned management of human activities that might affect fish habitats to prevent destruction and subsequent loss of fisheries benefits. includes (a) parts of fish: (b) shellfish, crustaceans, marine animals and any parts of shellfish, crustaceans or marine animals: and (c) the eggs, sperm, spawn, larvae, spat and juvenile stages of fish, shellfish, crustaceans and marine animals. (Fisheries Act, Sec. 2). Spawning grounds and nursery, rearing, food supply and migration areas on which fish depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life processes. (Fisheries Act, sec. 34(l)).
Watercourse
Pathways of effect
Risk assessment matrix Residual effects Canadian Environmental Assessment Act
Compensation/Off-setting
Conservation (of habitats)
Fish
Fish Habitats
Fish Habitat Management Program Those activities, legislative responsibilities and policies administered by Fisheries and
Oceans Canada for the purpose of conserving, restoring and developing the productive capacity of habitats for the fisheries resources.
Fish Habitat Management Plan
A plan prepared for a region or a specific geographic area of a region which includes an outline of the Departments requirements for conserving, restoring and developing fish habitat to meet fisheries stock production objectives and for use as the basis for consultation in integrated resource planning.
Lake Sturgeon
79
Fisheries Resources
Fish stocks or populations that sustain commercial, recreational or Native fishing activities of benefit to Canadians. Structural and non-structural measures undertaken to limit the adverse impact of natural hazards, environmental degradation and technological hazards. Actions taken during the planning, design, construction and operation of works and undertakings to alleviate potential adverse effects on the productive capacity of fish habitats.
Mitigation
Net Gain
An increase in the productive capacity of habitats for selected fisheries brought about by determined government and public efforts to conserve, restore and develop habitats. A working principle by which Fisheries and Oceans Canada strives to balance unavoidable habitat losses with habitat replacement on a project-by-project basis so that further reductions to Canadas fisheries resources due to habitat loss or damage may be prevented. The maximum natural capability of habitats to produce healthy fish, safe for human consumption, or to support or produce aquatic organisms upon which fish depend. Prescribing guidelines and conditions, and enforcing laws for the purpose of preventing the harmful alteration, destruction or disruption of fish habitat. Critical habitat means the habitat that is necessary for the survival or recovery of a listed wildlife species and that is identified as the species critical habitat in the recovery strategy or in an action plan for the species. The treatment or clean-up of fish habitat that has been altered, disrupted or degraded for the purpose of increasing its capability to sustain a productive fisheries resource.
No Net Loss
Productive Capacity
Protection (of habitats)
Critical Habitat (SARA)
Restoration (of habitats)
80

OWA BMP Sturgeon Report 09

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

OWA BMP Sturgeon Report 09

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ontario Waterpower Association

Best Management Practices Guide for Waterpower Projects

A Report Prepared by AECOM Canada Ltd.

Project Number: 108256-90113

Daniel P. Gibson, B.Sc. Dan.Gibson@aecom.com DG:mm Encl.

Best Management Practices Guide

Best Management Practices Guide

Ontario Waterpower Association

Best Management Practices Guide

Best Management Practices Guide

(DU7) (DU5) (DU6)

Legend Water Power Generating Station Watershed with Lake Sturgeon

DFO Designation Units

Lake Sturgeon Distribution and Water Power Generating Stations

Best Management Practices Guide Lake Sturgeon 2

Lake Sturgeon Distribution and Water Power Generating Stations/

(DU7) (DU5) (DU6)

Legend Potential Generating Station Watershed with Lake Sturgeon

DFO Designation Units

Lake Sturgeon Distribution and Potential Power Generating Stations

Best Management Practices Guide Lake Sturgeon 3

Ontario Waterpower Association

Figure 2. Overview of Waterpower Facility

(Courtesy: www.window.state.tx.us/specialrpt/energy/renewable/images/exhibit19-1.png, March, 2008)

Best Management Practices Guide

Ontario Waterpower Association

Best Management Practices Guide

2.0 Framework of Best Management Practices Guide

Project Screening Overview Planning Process

Best Management Practices Guide

Figure 3. Best Management Practices Conceptual Process

Ontario Waterpower Association

Figure 4. Project Screening Overview

Best Management Practices Guide

Impact Identification Pathways of Effect

Ontario Waterpower Association

Potentially Applicable Legislation

alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat, unless authorized by DFO;

Passage of fish around migration barriers;

fish by means other than fishing, unless authorized by DFO; and

Best Management Practices Guide

Figure 5. DFO Risk Management Framework Matrix

Ontario Waterpower Association

Level III: In addition to all of the above, the

Best Management Practices Guide

Ontario Waterpower Association

Best Management Practices Guide

Ontario Waterpower Association

Ontario Water Resources Act (Ministry of the Environment)1

Best Management Practices Guide

4.0 History and Ecology of the Lake Sturgeon

Best Management Practices Guide

Lake Sturgeon Designatable Units in Canada

Designatable Name of Population Unit

DU1 DU2 DU3 DU4 DU5 DU6 DU7 DU8

Western Hudson Bay Saskatchewan River Nelson River

Endangered Endangered Endangered

Ontario Waterpower Association

Best Management Practices Guide

Ontario Waterpower Association

Best Management Practices Guide

5. Lake Sturgeon and Dams

Best Management Practices Guide