sabina gold & silver corp. back river project 2014 fish...

December 2014Rescan Environmental Services Ltd., an ERM companyERM Rescan Building, 15th Floor - 1111 West Hastings StreetVancouver, BC Canada V6E 2J3Tel: (604) 689-9460 Fax: (604) 687-4277

BACK RIVER PROJECT2014 Fish and Fish Habitat Assessmentof the Tailings Impoundment Area Alternative Site

Sabina Gold & Silver Corp.

BACK RIVER PROJECT

2014 FISH AND FISH HABITAT ASSESSMENT OF

THE TAILINGS IMPOUNDMENT AREA

ALTERNATIVE SITE

December 2014

Project #0234411-0011

Citation:

Rescan. 2014. Back River Project: 2014 Fish and Fish Habitat Assessment of the Tailings Impoundment Area

Alternative Site. Prepared for Sabina Gold & Silver Corp. by Rescan Environmental Services Ltd., an ERM company.

Prepared for:

Sabina Gold & Silver Corp.

Prepared by:

Rescan Environmental Services Ltd., an ERM company

Vancouver, British Columbia

BACK RIVER PROJECT 2014 Fish and Fish Habitat Assessment of the

Tailings Impoundment Area Alternative Site

Executive Summary

SABINA GOLD & SILVER CORP. i

Executive Summary

The Back River Project (the Project) is an exploration gold project owned by Sabina Gold & Silver Corp.

(Sabina) located in the West Kitikmeot region of Nunavut. A baseline fish and fish habitat program was

completed in 2014 to support freshwater fish and fish habitat assessment at the Tailings Impoundment

Area (TIA) Alternative Site at the Goose Property Area.

The objectives of this program were to asses fish presence/absence and fish habitat value in ponds and

streams within the footprint and downstream of the proposed TIA Alternative Site. Work included fish

habitat assessments in eight ponds and nine stream reaches and fish presence/absence sampling in five

ponds and eight stream reaches.

Overall, fish habitat was of marginal value in ponds and stream reaches sampled within the TIA

Alternative Site footprint. Downstream and outside of the TIA Alternative Site, two stream reaches had

marginal fish habitat value and an additional two stream reaches had fish habitat that was important to

at least one fish life history stage. Reaches containing important fish habitat included Main Goose Pit

Stream Reaches 7 and 13, which provide the potential for good rearing and migration habitat for Arctic

Grayling. These reaches were the nearest to Goose Lake of all sampled reaches and were located

400 m (Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 13) and 1.1 km (Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 7) downstream of

the TIA Alternative Site.

Most ponds surveyed within the TIA Alternative Site footprint had only marginally suitable rearing

habitat and no overwintering habitat for fish (depths < 2 m), with the exception of Ponds 10 and 13.

Although Pond 10 had an estimated maximum depth greater than two meters, potentially providing

overwintering habitat, migration into Pond 10 is likely restricted by ephemeral and low flows. Pond 13,

which borders the TIA Alternative Site, had sufficient water depth and habitat complexity to provide

good habitat potential for rearing and overwintering fish and was classified as important fish habitat.

One season of fisheries sampling in 2014 suggests that the waterbodies located within the footprint of

the TIA Alternative Site are not fish-bearing, with the possible exception of Pond 13. No fish were

captured at five stream reaches and five ponds within the TIA Alternative Site. Pond 13, located on the

southwest margin of the TIA Alternative Site, was not sampled, but is likely to be fish bearing due to its

large area, direct and close connection to fish bearing lakes (Rascal and Wolf lakes), and sufficient

depth for overwintering. Outside the footprint of the TIA Alternative Site, fish were captured only in

the furthest downstream reach (Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 7) of the three sampled reaches

connecting the TIA Alternative Site to Goose Lake. Seven young-of-year Arctic Grayling were captured

in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 7, between 1.1 and 1.6 km downstream of the TIA Alternative Site.

This confirmed the fish-bearing status reported in 2013, which indicated the presence of Ninespine

Stickleback in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 7 and Reach 8 (located approximately 350 m downstream

of the TIA Alternative Site).



Acknowledgements

SABINA GOLD & SILVER CORP. iii

Acknowledgements

This report was prepared for Sabina Gold & Silver Corp. (Sabina) by ERM Rescan. The 2014 fish and fish

habitat fieldwork was conducted by Kathryn Kuchapski (M.Sc.), Tomasz Gradowski (Ph.D., R.P.Bio, P.Ag.),

Joel Crawford (B.A.), and Jesse Holla (B.Sc.). The report was prepared by Kathryn Kuchapski and was

reviewed by Kerry Marchinko (Ph.D., M.Sc., R.P.Bio.) and Deborah Muggli (Ph.D., M.Sc., R.P.Bio.).

The Back River project was managed by Deborah Muggli, with project coordination assistance from Korina

Houghton (B.Sc.).



Table of Contents

SABINA GOLD & SILVER CORP. v

BACK RIVER PROJECT

2014 FISH AND FISH HABITAT ASSESSMENT OF

THE TAILINGS IMPOUNDMENT AREA

ALTERNATIVE SITE

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ i

Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... iii

Table of Contents ......................................................................................................... v

List of Figures ................................................................................................... vi

List of Tables .................................................................................................... vii

List of Plates .................................................................................................... vii

List of Appendices ............................................................................................. viii

Glossary and Abbreviations ............................................................................................. ix

1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 1-1

2. Methods ......................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Study Area ............................................................................................ 2-1

2.2 Fieldwork Methods .................................................................................. 2-1

2.2.1 Fish Habitat................................................................................. 2-1

2.2.1.1 Streams ......................................................................... 2-1

2.2.1.2 Ponds ............................................................................ 2-8

2.2.2 Fish Community ............................................................................ 2-8

2.2.2.1 Streams ......................................................................... 2-8

2.2.2.2 Ponds .......................................................................... 2-12

2.3 Data Analysis ....................................................................................... 2-12

2.3.1 Fish Habitat............................................................................... 2-12

2.3.2 Fish Community .......................................................................... 2-12

2.4 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ........................................................ 2-12

3. Results ........................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Fish Habitat........................................................................................... 3-1

3.1.1 Streams ...................................................................................... 3-1

3.1.2 Ponds ...................................................................................... 3-12

2014 FISH AND FISH HABITAT ASSESSMENT OF THE TAILINGS IMPOUNDMENT AREA ALTERNATIVE SITE

vi RESCAN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LTD., AN ERM COMPANY | PROJ#0234411-0011 | REV A.1 | DECEMBER 2014

3.2 Fish Community .................................................................................... 3-22

3.2.1 Species Composition .................................................................... 3-22

3.2.2 Streams .................................................................................... 3-24

3.2.3 Ponds ...................................................................................... 3-26

3.3 Fish Bearing Status ................................................................................ 3-26

4. Summary ........................................................................................................ 4-1

References ............................................................................................................... R-1

List of Figures

FIGURE PAGE

Figure 1-1. Back River Project Location ............................................................................ 1-2

Figure 1-2. Location of TIA Alternative Site, Goose Property Area, 2014 .................................... 1-3

Figure 2.1-1. Fish and Fish Habitat Sampling Locations in TIA Alternative Site Area, 2014 ............... 2-3

Figure 2.2-1. Stream Reaches and Habitat Survey Sites in TIA Alternative Site Area, 2014 .............. 2-5

Figure 2.2-2. Stream Electrofishing Sampling Locations, 2014 ................................................. 2-9

Figure 2.2-3. Stream Minnow Trap Sampling Locations, 2014 ................................................ 2-11

Figure 2.2-4. Pond 6 Minnow Trap Sampling Locations, 2014 ................................................ 2-13




Figure 2.2-8. Pond 10 Minnow Trap Sampling Locations, 2014 ............................................... 2-17

Figure 3.1-1. Pond 6 Shoreline Habitat Zones, 2014 ........................................................... 3-13




Figure 3.1-5. Pond 10 Shoreline Habitat Zones, 2014 .......................................................... 3-19

Figure 3.1-6. Pond 11 and 12 Shoreline Habitat Zones, 2014 ................................................. 3-20

Figure 3.1-7. Pond 13 Shoreline Habitat Zones, 2014 .......................................................... 3-23

Figure 3.3-1. Fish Presence/Absence in TIA Alternative Site Area, 2014 ................................... 3-27

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SABINA GOLD & SILVER CORP. vii

List of Tables

TABLE PAGE

Table 2.2-1. Fish and Fish Habitat Sampling Summary for TIA Alternative Site Area, 2014 .............. 2-2

Table 2.2-2. Fish Habitat Inventory Attributes Assessed and Measured at Stream Sites, 2014 ........... 2-7

Table 2.2-3. Stream Morphology Codes and Descriptions ....................................................... 2-7

Table 2.2-4. Stream Channel Type and Boundary Codes and Descriptions ................................... 2-8

Table 2.3-1. Catch-Per-Unit Effort Calculations Used in Community Sampling Analysis ................. 2-12

Table 3.2-1. Fish Life History Periodicity Table for Arctic Grayling ......................................... 3-24

Table 3.2-2. Summary of Electrofishing CPUE and Visual Observations of Fish in TIA Alternative

Area Streams, 2014 ......................................................................................... 3-25

Table 3.3-1. Fish Presence, Habitat Quality and Barriers to Fish Passage in Waterbodies in the

TIA Alternative Site Area, 2013 and 2014 ............................................................... 3-29

List of Plates

PLATE PAGE

Plate 3.1-1. An aerial view, facing upstream, of braided channel sections and scour pools in Main

Goose Pit Stream Reach 7. September 10, 2014. ........................................................ 3-2

Plate 3.1-2. A scour pool in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 7 with cobble and gravel substrate.

September 10, 2014. .......................................................................................... 3-2

Plate 3.1-3. Braided glide habitat in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 8, downstream of Pond 12.

September 10, 2014. .......................................................................................... 3-3

Plate 3.1-4. Boulder garden feature in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 8, near Pond 11, created a

dry channel barrier to fish passage on the survey date. September 9, 2014. ...................... 3-3

Plate 3.1-5. Shallow, narrow glides provide poor quality rearing habitat for fish in Main Goose Pit

Stream Reach 9. September 9, 2014. ...................................................................... 3-4

Plate 3.1-6. Dry channel in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 9. September 9, 2014. ......................... 3-4

Plate 3.1-7. Overland flow and isolated pools in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 10.

September 9, 2014. ........................................................................................... 3-5

Plate 3.1-8. Glide habitat with poor connectivity in the eastern channel of Main Goose Pit

Stream Reach 11 (R11-2E). September 9, 2014. ......................................................... 3-6

Plate 3.1-9. Isolated pools formed in the intermittent western channel (R11-2W) of Main Goose

Pit Stream Reach 11. September 9, 2014. ................................................................ 3-6

Plate 3.1-10. Glide habitat with boulder and fine substrates in the eastern channel of Main


Plate 3.1-11. Boulder garden feature in the western channel of Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 12

(R12-3W). September 9, 2014. .............................................................................. 3-8


viii RESCAN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LTD., AN ERM COMPANY | PROJ#0234411-0011 | REV A.1 | DECEMBER 2014

Plate 3.1-12. Gravel substrates provide suitable spawning habitat for Arctic Grayling in Main


Plate 3.1-13. Abundant and diverse cover types in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 13 create good

rearing habitat for multiple fish species. September 10, 2014. .......................................... 3-9

Plate 3.1-14. Boulder features in the lower section of Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 14 (R14-1)

create seasonal barriers to fish passage. September 10, 2014. ..................................... 3-10

Plate 3.1-15. Glide habitat and overland flows in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 14 near Pond 9.

September 8, 2014. ......................................................................................... 3-10

Plate 3.1-16. Flat habitat unit in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 15. September 8, 2014 ................ 3-11

Plate 3.1-17. Aerial view of flat habitat in Main Goose Pit Stream Reach 15, downstream of

Pond 10. September 8, 2014. ............................................................................. 3-11

Plate 3.1-18. Bedrock outcrop along the western shoreline of Pond 6. September 8, 2014. ........... 3-12

Plate 3.1-19. Boulder and cobble substrates along the eastern shoreline of Pond 7.

September 8, 2014. ......................................................................................... 3-15

Plate 3.1-20. Shallow narrows between the northern and southern basins of Pond 8.

September 9, 2014. ......................................................................................... 3-18

Plate 3.1-21. Bedrock outcrops along the shoreline of Pond 10. September 8, 2014. ................... 3-21

Plate 3.1-22. Boulders embedded in fine substrates and emergent vegetation growth along the

shoreline of Pond 11. September 10, 2014. ............................................................ 3-21

Plate 3.1-23. Inflow channels at the southern end of Pond 13. September 9, 2014. .................... 3-22

Plate 3.1-24. Aerial view of Pond 13 (facing south). September 9, 2014. ................................. 3-24

List of Appendices

Appendix 3.1-1. Stream Fish Habitat Inventory Data, TIA Alternative Site Area, Back River Project,

2014

Appendix 3.1-2. Pond Shoreline and Littoral Zone Fish Habitat Data, TIA Alternative Site Area, Back

River Project, 2014

Appendix 3.2-1. TIA Alternative Site Area Stream Electrofishing Sampling Effort and Species Summary,

Back River Project, 2014

Appendix 3.2-2. TIA Alternative Site Area Stream Minnow Trapping Sampling Effort and Species

Summary, Back River Project, 2014

Appendix 3.2-3. TIA Alternative Site Area Pond Electrofishing Sampling Effort and Species Summary,


Appendix 3.2-4. TIA Alternative Site Area Pond Minnow Trapping Sampling Effort and Species Summary,




Glossary and Abbreviations

SABINA GOLD & SILVER CORP. ix

Glossary and Abbreviations

Terminology used in this document is defined where it is first used. The following list will assist readers

who may choose to review only portions of the document.

AUP Animal Use Protocol

CPUE Catch-per-unit-effort

DC Dry Channel

DFO Department of Fisheries and Oceans

Dry/Int. Dry/Intermittent

NCD Non-classified Drainage

PDA Potential Development Area

RIC Resources Inventory Committee of British Columbia

TIA Tailings Impoundment Area



1. Introduction

SABINA GOLD & SILVER CORP. 1-1

1. Introduction

The Back River Project (the Project) is a proposed gold project owned by Sabina Gold & Silver Corp.

(Sabina) located in the West Kitikmeot region of Nunavut (Figure 1-1). This report presents the results

of the 2014 fish and fish habitat program which was developed to support freshwater fish and fish

habitat assessment at the Tailings Impoundment Area (TIA) Alternative Site (Figure 1-2).

The objectives of this program were to:

o complete one season of fish presence/absence sampling in ponds and streams within and near

the proposed TIA Alternative Site footprint; and

o assess the fish habitat value of ponds and streams within and near the proposed TIA Alternative

Site footprint.

Chapter 2 of this report presents the program methods, Chapter 3 presents results and discussion, and

Chapter 4 contains a brief summary. All raw data collected are included as appendices.

!.

!.

!.

!.

!.

_̂

#*

#*

Kilingoyak

(Kent P

eninsula)

Ekaluktutiak(Cambridge Bay)

Omingmaktok (Bay Chimo)Kugluktuk

Kingaok(Bathurst Inlet)

Yellowknife

Killinik(Victoria Island)

GeorgeProperty

Area

Nunavut

Northw

est Territories

Contwoyto Lake

Arct ic Circ le

Coronation Gulf

Great SlaveLake

Queen MaudGulf

Kiligiktokmik(Bathurst Inlet)

AylmerLake

GooseProperty

Area

Marine LaydownArea

Kilo

kgikto

k

(Weste

rnR

iver)

Hannigayok ( Back River )

105°0'0"W

105°0'0"W

110°0'0"W

110°0'0"W

115°0'0"W

115°0'0"W

68

°0'0

"N

68

°0'0

"N

66

°0'0

"N

66

°0'0

"N

64

°0'0

"N

64

°0'0

"N

PROJECT # 0234411-0026 GIS # BAC-06-201 August 26 2014

Back River Project Location

Figure 1-1

!. Community/Settlement

#* Existing Exploration Camp

_̂ Marine Laydown Area

1:3,500,0000 50 100

Kilometres

Projection: NTKP Lambert Conformal Conic

Back RiverProject

PROJECT # 0234411-0011 GIS # BAC-06-223 December 17, 2014

Tahikafalok Nahik(Propeller Lake)

SwanLake

GooseLake

PropellerWatershed

GooseWatershed

WolfWatershed

LlamaWatershed

BigWatershed

ChairWatershed

SwanWatershed

MobyWatershed

WaspLake

LeafLake

RabbitLake

WolfLake

FoxLake

GiraffeLake

LlamaLake

ChairLake

Pond 19

Po

nd

19

OF

EchoLake

RascalLake

GiraffeOF

GooseOF

D

elRiv

er

Ech

oO

F

GiraffeWatershed

MamLake

Pond A1

WRSA A

WRSA BBig

Lake

GanderPond

Pond 4

Pond L

Pond K

Pond I

Pond H

Pond G

Pond F

Pond 2

Pond 1

Pond E

Pond D

Pond C

Pond B

Pond A

UmweltLake

Pond J

101

1201

Main PitStream

ProposedAirstrip

MainPit

UmweltPit

LlamaPit

T IA

425000

425000

430000

430000

435000

435000

440000

440000

72

70

00

0

72

70

00

0

72

75

00

0

72

75

00

0

±TIA Alternative Site(October 2014)

Regional Study Area (RSA)

Local Study Area (LSA)


"S Underground Ramp

TCWR Winter Road Connector

Winter Road

Haul and Access Road

Diversion Channel

Water Intake

Landfill

Resource Pit

Proposed Airstrip

Tailings ImpoundmentArea Embankment

TailingsImpoundment Area

Waste Rock Storage Area

Camp\Plant Site

Explosives Storage

Stockpile Location

Quarry

Potential Development Area(PDA)

Sub-watershed Boundary

Flow Direction

Federal Watershed Delineation

Bathurst Inlet - Burnside River

Upper Back River

Queen Maud Gulf - Ellice River

Projection: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 13N

1:50,000

0 1 2

Kilometres

© Department of Natural Resources, Canada. All rights reserved.

_̂

#*

#*

!.

Kilogiktok(Bathurst Inlet, Southern Arm)

MainMap



UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

GooseProperty

Area

GeorgeProperty

Area

Tibbitt toContwoyto

Winter Road

TCWRWinter Road

Connector

MarineLaydown Area

BIPR WinterRoad Connector

NunavutNorthwest Territories

1:3,500,000

Location of TIA Alternative Site,Goose Property Area, 2014

Figure 1-2



2. Methods


2. Methods

2.1 STUDY AREA

The study area for the 2014 fish and fish habitat assessment included pond and stream habitats

associated with the TIA Alternative Site at the Goose Property (Figure 1-2 and 2.1-1). The sampled

waterbodies are located within the Wolf and Goose watersheds, drain to the north, and enter Goose

Lake along its southern and eastern shorelines. In general, the ponds that were sampled are fed by

overland flow from the Wolf Watershed and discharge via the sampled streams into Goose Lake. One

pond (Pond 13) is located higher in the watershed, is fed by flows from upstream lakes, and ultimately

discharges into Goose Lake via Rascal Lake and the Rascal Stream system (Figure 2.1-1).

2.2 FIELDWORK METHODS

Fieldwork was designed to identify fish and fish habitat in ponds and streams potentially affected by the

development of a tailings impoundment area at the TIA Alternative Site location. Fieldwork was

completed from September 7 to 10, 2014. Fish habitat sampling was completed in all waterbodies

(six ponds and five stream reaches) found within or partially within (Pond 13) the TIA Alternative Site

footprint and in two ponds and four stream reaches downstream (Figure 2.1-1 and Table 2.2-1). Fish

community sampling was completed in five ponds and all stream reaches found exclusively within the TIA

alternative footprint and in three additional stream reaches downstream (Figure 2.1-1 and Table 2.1-1).

2.2.1 Fish Habitat

2.2.1.1 Streams

Streams in the TIA Alternative Site were located in the field by performing aerial observations from a

helicopter flying at low elevation to determine drainage patterns. The length of each stream was then

walked by a field crew in order to identify permanent and ephemeral stream reaches. Where water

flowed overland but was not associated with a continuous channel of at least 50 m in length, the site

was labeled as a non-classified drainage (NCD). Sites where a channel was identified, but the channel

was void of water were labeled Dry Channel (DC). Channels that contained only unconnected pools of

water were labeled Dry/Intermittent (Dry/Int.). NCD and DC sites are not considered fish habitat and

were not assessed further. Where water flowed through a continuous or intermittent channel, fish

habitat surveys were undertaken.

Each stream was divided into reaches delimited by hydrological features (ponds and confluences) and

detailed assessments were performed over sections of each reach with relatively homogenous habitat

(Figure 2.2-1). The length of habitat assessment sites was dependent on the length of the reach and

the homogeneity of habitat within the reach. Fish habitat was assessed by filling out a site card

according to the Reconnaissance (1:20,000) Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory (RIC 1999). The site card

assessment included the evaluation of channel characteristics, substrate type, physical measurements,

habitat characteristics, cover and habitat quality for fish. A complete list of the attributes measured is

presented in Table 2.2-2. Physical measurements and habitat characteristics were quantified using a

measuring tape, measuring stick or by visual estimation. Conductivity (µS/cm) and pH were recorded

using electronic meters. Habitat assessment site locations were referenced with a handheld GPS unit.


2-2 RESCAN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LTD., AN ERM COMPANY | PROJ#0234411-0011 | REV A.1 | DECEMBER 2014

Table 2.2-1. Fish and Fish Habitat Sampling Summary for TIA Alternative Site Area, 2014

Location Site Name

UTM

Fish

Habitat

Fish Community

Zone Easting Northing

Minnow

Trapping Electrofishing

Within TIA Alternative

Site Footprint

Pond 6 13 434485 7267770 X X X

Pond 7 13 434992 7267508 X X X

Pond 8 13 435357 7266749 X X X

Pond 9 13 435465 7267793 X X X

Pond 10 13 436395 7267577 X X X

Main Goose Pit Stream

Reach 10

13 434771 7267923 X X


Reach 11

13 434771 7267923 X X


Reach 12

13 435097 7267352 X X


Reach 14

13 435421 7268259 X X


Reach 15

13 435449 7268251 X X

Partially Within TIA

Alternative Site

Footprint

Pond 13 13 435120 7266059 X

Downstream of TIA

Alternative Site

Footprint

Pond 11 13 434769 7268329 X

Pond 12 13 434898 7268210 X


Reach 7

13 434481 7269394 X X


Reach 8

13 434770 7268653 X X X


Reach 9

13 434880 7268168 X X X


Reach 13

13 435358 7268549 X

Blanks indicate sampling not performed

Stream morphology, channel type, and channel boundary were determined based on habitat features

that are often present in Arctic streams but that may not appear in the southern streams for which the

Reconnaissance (1:20,000) Fish and Fish Habitat Inventory (RIC 1999) was designed. These

characteristics were classified into categories that suitably describe Arctic stream habitats. Categories

used for stream morphology classification are described in Table 2.2-3 and categories used for channel

type and boundary classification are described in Table 2.2-4.

Assessment of fish habitat quality for spawning, rearing, migration, and overwintering was based on habitat

measures and the habitat preferences of life history stages of fish species that are known to use Arctic

stream habitats in the Potential Development Area including Ninespine Stickleback (Pungitius pungitius),

Burbot (Lota lota), Slimy Sculpin (Cottus cognatus) and Arctic Grayling (Thymallus arcticus) (Scott and

Crossman 1973, Rescan 2014). Fish habitats were given a ranking of good, fair, poor or none. From these

fish habitat qualities, an overall ranking was determined as either critical, important, marginal, or none.

Critical habitat provides fish habitat that is necessary but limited in the area. If critical habitat were

removed, fish in that area may not be able to access alternative habitat for that life history stage.

Important habitat provides fair or good fish habitat for one or more life history stages. Marginal habitat

provides poor or no habitat for all life stages, or contains barriers that limit the accessibility of the habitat

to fish. If no habitat is provided for any life stage, the area has no overall habitat quality.

PROJECT # 0234411-0011 GIS # BAC-06-224 December 17, 2014

Fish and Fish Habitat Sampling Locationsin TIA Alternative Site Area, 2014

Figure 2.1-1

")")

")")

")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

GooseLake

GooseWatershed

WolfWatershed

LlamaWatershed

WolfLake

FoxLake

Pond 19

EchoLake

RascalLake

Ech

oO

F

WRSA B

GanderPond

Pond 4

Pond L

Pond K

Pond I

Pond H

Pond G

Pond F

Pond J

ProposedAirstrip

MainPit

Pond 6

Pond 7

Pond 8

Pond 10

Pond 9

Pond 13

Pond 11

Pond 12

430000

430000

431000

431000

432000

432000

433000

433000

434000

434000

435000

435000

436000

436000

437000

437000

438000

438000

439000

439000

72

66

00

0

72

66

00

0

72

67

00

0

72

67

00

0

72

68

00

0

72

68

00

0

72

69

00

0

72

69

00

0

72

70

00

0

72

70

00

0

±")

Stream Fish CommunitySampling Location

Stream Fish HabitatSurvey Location

TIA Alternative Site(October 2014)



Diversion Channel

Resource Pit

Proposed Airstrip


Explosives Storage

Quarry




Upper Back River



Flow Direction


1:25,000

0 0.5 1

Kilometres


_̂

#*

#*

!.


MainMap



UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

GooseProperty

Area

Tibbitt to Contwoyto

Winter Road

GeorgeProperty Area

TCWRWinter RoadConnector

MarineLaydown Area



1:3,500,000

Pond Fish Habitat SurveyLocation

Pond Fish CommunitySampling Location

PROJECT #0234411-0005 GIS # BAC-06-233 November 21 2014

Stream Reaches and Habitat Survey Sites in TIA Alternative Site Area, 2014

Figure 2.2-1

Fig

ure

2.2

-1

Main Goose PitStream Reach 7


Rascal StreamMain Goose Pit

Stream Reach 3


WRSA B

Main Pit

ProposedAirstrip



Rascal StreamEast Reach 3




UnnamedPond

UnnamedPond

GooseLake

RascalLake

Pond 6

Pond 11

Pond 12

Pond 7

Pond 8

Pond 9

Pond 10









R7-3

R8-1

R8-2

R8-4

R9-1

R9-2

R10-1

R10-2

R11-1

R11-2WR11-2E

R12-1

R12-2

R12-3E

R12-3W

R13-1

R14-1

R14-2

R14-3

R14-4

R15-1

R15-2

R15-3R15-4

R15-5


1:12,000

0 200 400

Metres

±Fish Habitat Inventory Location


Stream by Reach

Reach 1

Reach 2

Reach 3

Reach 4

Reach 5

Reach 6

Reach 7

Reach 8

Reach 9

Reach 10

Reach 11

Reach 12

Reach 13

Reach 14

Reach 15

Flow Direction


Diversion Channel

Resource Pit

Proposed Airstrip



METHODS


Table 2.2-2. Fish Habitat Inventory Attributes Assessed and Measured at Stream Sites, 2014

Channel

Characteristics

Substrate

Type

Physical

Measurements Habitat Characteristics Cover Habitat Quality

Stream

Morphology

Dominant Length (m) Pool Type Deep Pool (%) Spawning

Channel Type Subdominant Wetted Depth

(m)

Pool Residual Depth (m) Boulder (%) Rearing

Channel Boundary D95 (cm) Bankfull Depth

(m)

Fish Passage Barriers Instream

Vegetation (%)

Migration

Channel Pattern D (cm) Wetted Width (m) Bank Texture Overhanging

Vegetation (%)

Overwintering

Channel

Confinement

Bankfull Width

(m)

Bank Shape Undercut Bank

(%)

Gradient (%) Riparian Vegetation Type

pH Instream Vegetation Type

Conductivity

(µS/cm)

Crown Closure (%)

Turbidity Features

Substrate Type: D = size of the largest substrate particle that will be moved at channel forming flows , D95 = diameter

of the substrate particle that is larger than 95% of substrate particles

Table 2.2-3. Stream Morphology Codes and Descriptions

Type Code Description

Boulder

Garden

BG Large boulders, usually only partially submerged, distributed through the stream channel and

providing high quality cover for juvenile and small fish. Often associated or in combination

with Rf habitat type.

Cascade Ca A series of small steps where stream falls over channel obstructions such as boulders and

organic debris. Often in series with Run and/or Pool habitat types.

Riffle Rf Shallow rapids where the water flows swiftly over completely or partially submerged materials

to produce surface agitation. Usually less than 0.2 m in depth, with a gradient of less than 4%.

Glide Areas of swiftly flowing water, without surface waves, which approximates uniform flow and in

which the slope of water surface is roughly parallel to the overall gradient of the stream

reach.

G1 high quality glide habitat; depth greater than 0.75 m.

G2 intermediate quality habitat; depth 0.3 to 0.75 m.

G3 poor quality glide habitat; less than 0.3 m in depth.

Flat Areas of still, often stagnant water. Substrate usually covered in silt or organic matter. Though

fish habitat quality is usually poor, deep flats can provide cover for holding fish.

F1 high quality flat habitat; depth greater than 0.75 m.

F2 intermediate quality flat habitat; depth 0.3 to 0.75 m.

F3 poor quality flat habitat; depth less than 0.3 m.

Pool Portions of the stream with reduced current velocity at low flow and deeper water than

surrounding areas. Often associated with Run habitat types.

P1 high quality pool habitat; depth greater than 0.75 m.

P2 intermediate quality pool habitat; depth between 0.3 and 0.75 m.

P3 poor quality pool habitat; depth less than 0.3 m.

Bedrock BR Very shallow stream flow over a bedrock outcrop. When combined with steep gradient, forms a

fish passage barrier. Poor habitat quality.



Table 2.2-4. Stream Channel Type and Boundary Codes and Descriptions

Type Code Description

Channel C1 single stream channel (no bars, islands, or side channels) throughout the survey section.

C2 occasional bars, creating areas within the survey section with more than one channel. No

more than 50 % of the survey section has multiple channels.

C3 stream channel is heavily braided. More than 50 % of the survey section consists of

multiple channels.

Channel

Boundary

D1 stream is confined to a well-defined channel with a distinct boundary at the water’s edge.

D2 up to 50 % of the stream survey section possesses no distinct channel.

D3 there is no distinct channel. Stream is often dispersed through grasses or other vegetation

and/or boulders.

2.2.1.2 Ponds

Fish habitat was assessed in each pond through a visual survey of the shoreline and littoral zone.

The shoreline and littoral zone were grouped into units of relatively homogenous habitat. The substrate

of each unit was recorded as a percent of surface area covered by a type of substrate

(e.g., 50% boulder and 50% fines). Substrate types were defined by their average particle diameter:

fines (less than 2 mm), gravel (2 to 64 mm), cobble (64 to 256 mm), boulder (256 to 4,000 mm), and

bedrock (greater than 4,000 mm). Emergent and submergent vegetation can provide cover for fish, and

the presence and type of shoreline vegetation in each habitat unit was recorded.

In Ponds 6, 9, 11 and 12, depth and substrate conditions permitted the maximum depth of the pond to

be measured by wading to the deepest point and measuring depth with a measuring stick. In Ponds 7,

8, 10 and 13, the deepest point could not be reached by wading and the maximum depth was

estimated from aerial surveys. Any inflows and outflows at each pond were identified and photographs

were taken of representative habitat types.

2.2.2 Fish Community

The fish communities of ponds and streams in the TIA Alternative Site Area were sampled to determine

fish presence/absence by a combination of backpack electrofishing and minnow trapping according to

Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Licence to Fish for Scientific Purposes #S-14/15-1016-NU and

Animal Use Protocol (AUP) #FWI-ACC-2014-043.

2.2.2.1 Streams

The fish communities of streams in the TIA Alternative Site area were surveyed by backpack

electrofishing at 18 sites (Figure 2.2-2) and minnow trapping in two stream reaches (Figure 2.2-3).

Fish presence and species composition, rather than density, was the primary purpose of sampling, thus

single pass electrofishing with no use of stop nets was performed. At each electrofishing site, the

length of the stream surveyed was between 53 and 200 m and depended on the presence of a section

of homogenous habitat. Sites that were shorter than 100 m were sampled for a minimum of

100 electrofishing seconds while sites that were longer than 100 m were sampled for a minimum of

150 seconds. Sampling was conducted by one crew leader and one dip netter. The anode ring diameter

was 28 cm and the dip net was 21 cm in diameter and contained 3.2 mm mesh. A systematic sweep

sampling approach was conducted at each site. Electrofishing effort in seconds and the voltage (V),

frequency (Hz), and pulse width (ms) settings were recorded for each site.

PROJECT # 0234411-0011 GIS # BAC-06-225 November 21, 2014

Stream ElectrofishingSampling Locations, 2014

Figure 2.2-2

GooseWatershed

WolfWatershed

EchoLake

RascalLake

Echo

OF

WRSA B

GanderPond

Pond 4

Pond L

Pond K

Pond H

Pond G

Pond J

ProposedAirstrip

MainPit

Pond 6

Pond 7

Pond 8

Pond 10

Pond 9

Pond 11

Pond 12

R7-1

R7-2

R7-3b

R7-3a

R8-1

R8-2

R8-3

R8-4

R9-1

R10-1

R10-2

R11-2E

R12-1

R12-2

R12-3E

R14-3

R15-4

R15-5

432000

432000

433000

433000

434000

434000

435000

435000

436000

436000

437000

437000

72

67

00

0

72

67

00

0

72

68

00

0

72

68

00

0

72

69

00

0

72

69

00

0

±Electrofishing SamplingLocation



Diversion Channel

Resource Pit

Proposed Airstrip


Explosives Storage

Quarry




Upper Back River



Flow Direction


1:15,000

0 250 500

Metres


_̂

#*

#*

!.


MainMap



UT

MZ

on

e1

3

UT

MZ

on

e1

2

GooseProperty

Area

Tibbitt to Contwoyto

Winter Road

GeorgeProperty Area

TCWRWinter RoadConnector

MarineLaydown Area



1:3,500,000

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

Pond 11

Pond 12

1

2

3

4

7

9

6

8

5

20

21

22

19

23

17

18

15

16

12

1110

13

14

434700

434700

434800

434800

434900

434900

72

68

10

0

72

68

10

0

72

68

20

0

72

68

20

0

72

68

30

0

72

68

30

0

72

68

40

0

72

68

40

0

72

68

50

0

72

68

50

0


1:2,000

0 30 60

Metres

±

PROJECT # 0234411-0011 GIS # BAC-06-226 November 21 2014

Stream Minnow Trap Sampling Locations, 2014

Figure 2.2-3

!( Minnow Trap



Minnow traps were placed in the inflow and outflow streams of Ponds 11 and 12 (Main Goose Pit Stream

Reaches 8 and 9; Figure 2.2-3). Minnow traps consisted of two cylinders of 6.3 mm galvanized metal

mesh measuring 42 cm long and 23 cm in diameter with a 2 cm diameter opening. The cylinders were

locked together using a clip attached to a rope and buoy. Minnow traps baited with commercial prawn

bait were set at depths of 0.2 to 1.0 m and left to fish overnight. Any fish captured were identified to

species, enumerated and released to the stream locations where they were captured.

2.2.2.2 Ponds

The fish communities of Ponds 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 were sampled by electrofishing and minnow trapping in

shallow, littoral areas. Backpack electrofishers were used to sample the shoreline of the ponds by the

same methods used for stream sampling. A minimum of 500 electrofishing seconds of effort was

expended at small ponds (Pond 9) and a minimum of 1000 electrofishing seconds of effort was

expended at larger ponds (Ponds 6, 7, 8, and 10).

Minnow traps were set along the shorelines of ponds by the same methods used for stream sampling.

Figures 2.2-4 to 2.2-8 show the locations where minnow traps were set in each sampled pond in the TIA

Alternative Site footprint. Any fish captured were identified to species, enumerated and released to the

waterbody location where they were captured.

2.3 DATA ANALYSIS

2.3.1 Fish Habitat

Fish habitat data in streams were based on measurements made over representative segments of each

reach surveyed. Where applicable, habitat characteristics within a site are reported as the mean of all

measurements within that section.

2.3.2 Fish Community

Fish presence/absence and species composition were summarized in sampled ponds and streams.

Where applicable, catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) was calculated to provide an index of relative

abundance that can be used to compare fish populations among different areas. CPUE is defined as the

number of fish captured per sampling device per unit time (Table 2.3-1).

Table 2.3-1. Catch-Per-Unit Effort Calculations Used in Community Sampling Analysis

Sampling Gear CPUE Calculation

Minnow trap CPUE = number of fish caught per trap *[(24 h / (set time, h)]

Electrofisher CPUE = number of fish caught * [100/(electrofishing effort, s)]

CPUE = Catch-per-unit-effort

2.4 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL

Quality assurance and quality control was implemented to ensure accurate data collection and analysis.

Methods and gear types for fish community sampling and habitat assessments were selected to ensure

sampling and data collection were being conducted in a standardized manner. Field water quality

meters were calibrated prior to the beginning of the field trip. Summary and graphical analyses of the

data were completed according to established standards and best practice.

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

9

87

6

5

4

3

2

1

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

434400

434400

434500

434500

434600

434600

72

67

60

0

72

67

60

0

72

67

70

0

72

67

70

0

72

67

80

0

72

67

80

0

72

67

90

0

72

67

90

0


1:1,500

0 20 40

Metres

±

PROJECT # 0234411-0011 GIS # BAC-06-227 November 21 2014

Pond 6 Minnow Trap Sampling Locations, 2014

Figure 2.2-4

!( Minnow Trap

sabina gold & silver corp. back river project 2014 fish...

Documents