Join The Rescue Lake Simcoe Coalition Today!

Rescue Lake Simcoe Coalition

Rescue, Restore and Rehabilitate Lake Simcoe — Imagine the Future

Home » fisheries and oceans department

Tag: fisheries and oceans department

WHAT HAPPENED TO 1.2 MILLION WHITEFISH STOCKED INTO LAKE SIMCOE?

by

Neither the Minister nor MNRF staff are willing to publicly admit that there is a whitefish population decline in Lake Simcoe.

Guest blog by Wayne Lintack, Retired Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) Conservation Officer Midhurst District.

The Rescue Lake Simcoe Coalition (RLSC) has an interest in Lake whitefish in Lake Simcoe since “Coldwater fish are an important indicator of lake health as they are particularly sensitive to changes in dissolved oxygen and water quality,” (Loftus and Reiger 1972). The Lake Simcoe Protection Plan’s dissolved oxygen target is centered on the biological needs of these coldwater fish. They are a “keystone” species for Lake Simcoe, and we should pay close attention to their health, as an indicator of the lake’s health. 

Ontario’s Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) has recently acknowledged lake trout stocked prior to 2018 were not surviving in abundance, and that natural reproduction would never contribute to a meaningful population recovery. As a result, in 2023 MNRF made significant changes to the lake trout stocking program.

Biodiversity and monitoring staff doing fisheries monitoring surveys on Lake Simcoe Photo Credit: MNRF Aurora District. Source: https://www.ontario.ca/page/ministers-annual-report-lake-simcoe-2016#section-7

However, regarding whitefish, the last detailed accounts published on the status of Lake Simcoe whitefish were in a 2018 Science and Research Technical Report (Technical Report) entitled the “Status of Coldwater Fishes of Lake Simcoe,” (Flinigan, Graham and Langley, 2018), and in the Minister’s 10 Year Report on Lake Simcoe, published in 2020, which seems largely based on the 2018 Technical Report. Interestingly enough, neither of these reports spell out that the whitefish population itself has clearly declined between 2009 and 2018, even though every index MNRF routinely uses to monitor the abundance of both Lake Tout and whitefish on Lake Simcoe, including index nets as noted below, demonstrate that a decline in abundance of both stocked and wild whitefish clearly occurred, during a period of time when about 1.2 million whitefish were stocked.

Figure 4: Lake Simcoe cold-water fish catch from 2003 to 2018. Index Netting Graph from Ministers 10-year Report on Lake Simcoe. Source: https://www.ontario.ca/page/ministers-10-year-report-lake-Simcoe#section-2

As a further index to abundance, the Technical Report also stated it took increasingly more hours for ice fishermen and women over the study period to catch either a stocked or wild whitefish. The number of fish caught in each age group by the index nets is also an important indicator of the health of the fishery. The Minister reported, “while some wild fish are born each year, fish born in 2004 (20 years old), and 2012 (12 years old) make up most of the wild population.” Unfortunately, this is not a healthy age distribution for wild Lake Simcoe whitefish.

In summary, despite the above noted MNRF fisheries indices, neither the Minister nor MNRF staff are willing to publicly admit that there is an actual whitefish population decline in Lake Simcoe, which in part could have been the result of an unsuccessful whitefish stocking program during that time.

On the bright side, in the last 2 years, anglers seem to be catching more young wild whitefish, which is good news. However, it does not make sense for MNRF fisheries managers at this time to conclude that these two new age classes are large enough to reestablish a long term viable fishery for whitefish on Lake Simcoe when, their stocking program seems to be failing, their indices all show a significant decline in the whitefish population has already taken place, and the wild population consists of largely 12 and 20 year old  whitefish.

There will always be some mortality of both lake trout and whitefish stocked into Lake Simcoe, due to various causes, before they have grown large enough to be caught by anglers, or in the MNRF’s index nets. However, the evidence that points to the likelihood of an unusually high mortality rate among whitefish stocked since 2009 includes:

  • The MNRF acknowledged that their past lake trout stocking program was not successful.
  • Ice fishermen and women reporting that they are catching very few fin-clipped (identifying feature) stocked whitefish;
  • All MNRF whitefish abundance indicators since 2009 showed a whitefish population decline, and that from 2008 to 2017, out of 1.2 million stocked whitefish, only 1539 were caught in the index nets.

It is perplexing that out of a total of 5596 whitefish caught in the index nets during that period that only 1539 were fin clipped stocked whitefish. So, what happened to the 1.2 million whitefish stocked into Lake Simcoe?

I am concerned that the stocked whitefish may be dying from the same causes as the past stocked lake trout were. Since the causes of the past stocked lake trout mortality seem to be currently unknown, MNRF should not rule out the possibility that both the stocked lake trout and whitefish could have died from an undesirable change in the water quality of lake Simcoe, or some other unknown factors that could also be adversely affecting other fish communities in the lake as well.

During my last 15 years with MNR that I worked as a Conservation Officer, whitefish were so readily caught during the winter in Lake Simcoe, that Midhurst District Conservation Officers frequently targeted, caught, and charged individuals that caught and kept more than their legal limit of whitefish in one day. 

It was simply a fantastic winter fishery for whitefish during that time. In the 12 years since I retired it has been both frustrating and disheartening to ice fish those same shoals and experience the whitefish population decline firsthand, without ever hearing an acknowledgement by the Minister or MNRF staff that this is occurring. 

Please also consider that the Communication Services Branch of the MNRF are the “gate keepers” of the information received by the public on Lake Simcoe; what you are reading in public about Lake Simcoe is what the current government wants you to know about Lake Simcoe. 

MNRF and all government ministries like releasing good news stories to the public, and the decline in the whitefish population is not a good news story for Lake Simcoe. For example, the author of the Technical Report described, in the “Data Analysis” section, how he conducted an analysis of the stocking program, but the “Results and Discussion” section of this stocking analysis are completely missing from this MNRF published report. This only reaffirms to me that the whitefish stocking program is likely failing, and MNRF considers this a bad news story as well. 

Since it is very doubtful all three authors simply forgot to include the stocking “Results and Discussion” in a Science and Technical Report published by the Queen’s Printer for Ontario, I would like the Minister to please explain why the stocking “Results and Discussion” are mysteriously missing from the report? 

It will be a long and uncertain road back to reestablish a viable fishery for lake trout in Lake Simcoe. Unfortunately, MNRF has a history of being slow off the mark to publicly acknowledge and address declining populations of many fish and wildlife species in Ontario. 

 Let us hope that the Minister of MNRF and other MNR staff at all levels will not passively watch the ongoing whitefish population decline, the way some people consider they did for lake trout in the past, until it’s too late to re-establish a long term viable and healthy fishery for whitefish in Lake Simcoe.

Getting it Done: Wrecking Fish Habitat to Get the Bradford Bypass “Done”

by

World Water Week Update on The Bradford Bypass

Ontario’s new Get it Done Act means that Highway 413 will get the same treatment as the Bradford Bypass has been “enjoying” since the Ontario government exempted it from the conditions of its 2002 Environmental Assessment (EA) approval, and streamlined the EA. The approval was based on studies and knowledge at that time. That was 22 years ago. I think we can agree that a few things have changed since then.

In February this year, Rescue Lake Simcoe Coalition sent a package to the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO)  asking them to address a number of our concerns relating to areas of Federal Jurisdiction, which are protection of fish, First Nations treaty rights, contamination of water, species at risk, migratory birds, and climate change.  There have been no federal permits issued yet. 

From the route of the proposed Bypass. Holland River meanders north to Lake Simcoe.

In the letter, we urge the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) to proactively request a review of the Bradford Bypass’ impacts on fish and their habitat, before detailed design. An Environmental Assessment is meant to determine HOW to AVOID HARM. The current approach misses the mark by merely reporting on ways they could mitigate the harm, without considering moving the highway (except possibly to avoid MPP Stan Cho’s family’s golf course) to avoid harm. Some highlights of our research: 

  • Initially the project’s final Environmental Conditions Report show that there are lots of fish in almost every water body affected by the Bradford Bypass. So we question how only 3 out of 40 watercourses are listed as “significant fish habitat” in the Fish Conditions appendix to the Final Environmental Impact Assessment Report. This narrow conclusion could have grave impacts! 
  • No fishing, dip netting, or electrofishing was done to try to find the American Eel, endangered, but identified as being present by the Williams Treaties First Nations. “Don’t try, don’t get.” But that seems to be the point.
  • The habitat of the Red Side Dace (a little fish that eats mosquitos) flows into rivers that would be affected by the Bypass. AECOM, for MTO, did not fish in these rivers either. Instead, Ontario is proposing weakening the protection of Red Side Dace presumably to ease construction of the Bradford Bypass and Highway 413.
  • Between 2001 and 2022, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, ( DFO) NEVER denied a permit request for construction or failed to provide a “letter of advice” that authorizes the construction activity and provides mitigation requirements in the Lake Simcoe and Nottawasaga watersheds. A bit lop-sided, eh? There is room for improvement!
  • Salt Contamination: The highway will go over the East Holland River, which has exceeded the chronic chloride threshold (120 mg/L) for more than 20 years. And yet, there is no comprehensive examination of the habitat of the fish that the DFO is being asked to permit the destruction of. There are currently no regulations under the Fisheries Act that authorize the deposit of deleterious substances from road salting activities into water frequented by fish. We are trying to get some action taken on this – the evidence is overwhelming! 
  • The upshot is this: AECOM consulting team worked for MTO to produce a lot of studies that the province is generally ignoring. Instead they are dismantling the policies and practices that have protected these features and creatures. Or they stopped supporting some of their advisory committees so no one has the capacity to react. Or they gutted Conservation Authority roles and so no one with regulatory power is actually looking at the impacts of this highway. 

It is truly unacceptable in 2024 to have a climate-denying provincial government drive and continually weaken the Environmental Assessment processes. The next Lake Simcoe highway, 404 – Hwy 12, would also follow a streamlined process.  OUR water is affected. The FUTURE is affected. Doing all this damage while traffic studies have never supported this route is beyond offensive to those of us who think our governments are here to manage our commons and our future. 

Find our letter to the DFO here https://rescuelakesimcoe.org/package-for-dfo-bypass-salt-fish-fn-eel/

Please help us protect wildlife today by supporting our activism and engagement on the need to protect their habitat and water quality. https://rescuelakesimcoe.org/donate/

Please take action on salt pollution via our petition here! https://rescuelakesimcoe.org/salt-pollution/ 

Learn more about the Bradford Bypass and our opposition here https://rescuelakesimcoe.org/bbp/ 

About this image: This image depicts one area where water bodies will be affected by the Bypass. As an example of how rushed this work is, this DRAFT map appears in their final Environmental Conditions Report. But who cares? It’s self approved.