Issuu

LOUGHS AGENCY OF THE FOYLE CARLINGFORD AND IRISH LIGHTS COMMISSION

Loughs Agency Water Framework Directive Fish in Rivers Classification Report 2017 Water Framework Directive Fish Population Assessment Loughs Agency of the Foyle Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission Art Niven and Shannon Donnelly, August 2018

This report outlines results and classifications from Water Framework Directive fish surveillance and routine monitoring programmes within rivers of the Foyle and Carlingford areas during 2017

Headquarters 22, Victoria Road Derry ~ Londonderry BT47 2AB Northern Ireland Tel: +44(0)28 71 342100 Fax: +44(0)28 71 342720 general@loughs-agency.org www.loughs-agency.org

Regional Office Dundalk Street Carlingford Co Louth Republic of Ireland Tel+353(0)42 938 3888 Fax+353(0)42 938 3888 carlingford@loughs-agency.org www.loughs-agency.org

Report Reference LA/WFDFIR/18 CITATION: Niven, A.J & Donnelly, S. (2018) Loughs Agency Water Framework Directive Fish in Rivers Classification Report 2017. Loughs Agency, 22, Victoria Road, Derry~Londonderry Page 2 of 83

DOCUMENT CONTROL

Name of Document

Loughs Agency Water Framework Directive Fish in Rivers Classification Report 2017

Author (s):

Art Niven & Shannon Donnelly

Authorised Officer:

Art Niven

Description of Content:

WFD Fish Classification Report

Approved by:

John McCartney

Date of Approval:

August 2018

Assigned review period:

Annual

Date of next review:

May 2019

Document Code

LA/WFDFIR/18

This documents comprises

TOC

Text List of tables

Table of Figures

No. Appendices

Version Control Table

Version No. Version 1

Status Final copy

Author (s)

Reviewed by

Art Niven & Art Niven Shannon Donnelly

Approved by

Date of issue

John McCartney

31/08/2018

Revision 2

Page 3 of 83

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Loughs Agency sponsoring departments, board and staff are gratefully acknowledged for the funding, support and assistance provided to conduct Water Framework Directive fish monitoring in the Foyle and Carlingford areas. Land owners and angling associations are also gratefully acknowledged for their co-operation.

PROJECT STAFF 2017 Fisheries Biologist/Project Manager

Art Niven

GIS Manager

Rachel Scott

Assistant Scientific Officer

Jayne Colgan

Assistant Scientific Officer

Paul Doherty

Fisheries Bursar

Fearghail Armstrong

Fisheries Bursar

Roseanne Shelley

For further information contact art.niven@loughs-agency.org

@loughsagency

Loughs Agency TV

Page 4 of 83

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 10 1.0

INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 12

2.0

BASIS FOR WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE FISH CLASSIFICATION......... 12 Table 1. Habitat classification based on Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland (Fisheries Division) advisory leaflet on the evaluation of habitat for salmon and trout .................................................................... 14 Figure 1. WFD Fish surveillance river sites within the Foyle area, Northern Ireland and Ireland ................................................................................... 15 Fig 2. WFD fish surveillance river sites within the Carlingford area, Northern Ireland. There are no sites within Ireland in the Carlingford area. ........... 16

3.0

CLASSIFICATIONS .................................................................................... 17

3.1 F10029 River Mourne at Victoria Bridge GBNI1NW010102074 Mourne WFD Fish Classification 2017........................................................................ 17 Table 2. Electrofishing sampling results ................................................... 17 Fig 3. Site F10029 ..................................................................................... 17 3.11

Results .............................................................................................. 17

Fig 4. Total catch ...................................................................................... 18 Fig 5. Density/100m² ................................................................................ 18 Fig 6. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon n = 43 ................. 19 Fig 7. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 14 ..................... 19 Fig 8. Length frequency distribution for all salmon caught ....................... 20 Fig 9. Length frequency distribution for trout caught 2017 ...................... 20 3.12

Proposed Programme of Measures .................................................. 21

Fig 10. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class ......... 22 3.2 F10045 Derg River at Crew Bridge GBNI1NW010102095 Derg WFD Fish Classification 2017 ............................................................. 23 Table 3. Sampling results ......................................................................... 23 Page 5 of 83

Fig 11. Site F10045 ................................................................................... 23 3.21

Results .............................................................................................. 23

Fig 14. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon n = 49 ............... 25 Fig 15. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 8 ..................... 25 Fig 16. Length frequency distribution for salmon caught 2017 Fig 17. Length frequency distribution for trout caught. 2017 n = 8. 2014 n = 10 & 2011 n = 4. * Note surveys were single pass electrofishing survey only. 3.22

Proposed Programme of Measures .................................................. 28

Fig 18. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class ......... 29 3.3 F10049 Glendergan River at Sraghcumber GBNI1NW010102067 Derg WFD Fish Classification 2017........................................................................ 30 Table 4. Sampling results ......................................................................... 30 Fig 19. Site F10049 ................................................................................... 30 3.31

Results .............................................................................................. 30

Fig 20. Total catch .................................................................................... 31 Fig 21. Minimum density estimate/100m2 ............................................... 31 Fig 22. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic Salmon caught n = 30 ... 32 Fig 23. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 19 ................... 32 Fig 24. Length frequency distribution for all salmon caught 2017 ............ 33 Fig 25. Length frequency distribution for all trout caught 2017 ............... 33 3.32

Proposed Programme of Measures .................................................. 35

Fig 26. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class ......... 36 3.4 F10101 Fairywater at Mullanatoomog GBNI1NW010102041 Fairywater WFD Fish Classification 2017 ...................................................... 37 Table 5. Sampling results ......................................................................... 37 Fig 27. Site F10101 ................................................................................... 37 3.41

Results .............................................................................................. 37

Fig 28. Total catch .................................................................................... 38 Fig 29. Density estimate/100m2 ............................................................... 38 Page 6 of 83

Fig 30. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon caught n = 2 ..... 39 Fig 31. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 6 ..................... 39 Fig 32. Length frequency distribution of all Salmon caught 2017 n = 2, 2014 n = 4 & 2011 n = 40 .................................................................................. 40 Fig 33. Length frequency distribution of all trout caught 2017 3.42

Proposed Programme of Measures .................................................. 41

Fig 34. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class ......... 43 3.5 F10128 Drumragh River at Car Park GBNI1NW010102006 Drumragh WFD Fish Classification 2017........................................................................ 44 Table 6. Sampling results......................................................................... 44 Fig 35. Site F10128 ................................................................................... 44 3.51

Results .............................................................................................. 44

Fig 36. Total Catch .................................................................................... 45 Fig 37. Density estimate/100m2 ............................................................... 45 Fig 38. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon caught n = 31 ... 46 Fig 39. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 4 ..................... 46 Fig 40. Length frequency distribution for Salmon caught Fig 41. Length frequency distribution for Trout caught. 3.52

Proposed Programme of Measures .................................................. 48

Fig 42. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class ......... 50 Table 7. Sampling results ......................................................................... 51 Fig 43. Site F10148 ................................................................................... 51 3.61

Results .............................................................................................. 51

Fig 45. Density/100m2 .............................................................................. 52 Fig 46. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon caught n = 64 ... 53 Fig 47. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 10 ................... 53 Fig 48. Length frequency distribution for all salmon caught 2017 ............ 54 Fig 49. Length frequency distribution for all trout caught ........................ 54 3.62

Proposed Programme of Measures .................................................. 55 Page 7 of 83

Fig 50. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class ......... 57 3.7 F10171 Roe River at Limavady GBNI1NW020202018 Roe WFD Fish Classification 2017 ....................................................................................... 58 Table 8. Removal sampling results ........................................................... 58 Fig 51. Site F10171 ................................................................................... 58 3.71

Results .............................................................................................. 58

Fig 52. Total catch .................................................................................... 59 Fig 53. Density/100m² .............................................................................. 59 Fig 54. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic Salmon caught n = 90 ... 60 Fig 55. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 16 ................... 60 Fig 56. Length frequency distribution for all Salmon caught .................... 61 Fig 57. Length frequency distribution for all Trout caught........................ 61 3.72

Proposed Programme of Measures .................................................. 62

Fig 58. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class ......... 64 3.8 F10644 Kilbroney River at Newton Bridge GBNI1NB060604041 Carlingford WFD Fish Classification 2017 ..................................................... 65 Table 8. Removal sampling results ........................................................... 65 Fig 59. Site F10644 ................................................................................... 65 3.81

Results .............................................................................................. 65

Fig 61. Density/100m² .............................................................................. 66 Fig 62. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 121 ................. 67 Fig 63. Length frequency distribution for all trout caught ........................ 67 3.82

Proposed Programme of Measures .................................................. 68

Fig 64. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class ......... 69 3.9 F11335 Camowen River at Cranny Bridge Picnic Area GBNI1NW010108257 Camowen WFD Fish Classification 2017 .................... 70 Table 9. Removal sampling results ........................................................... 70 Fig 65. Site F11335 ................................................................................... 70 3.91

Results .............................................................................................. 70 Page 8 of 83

Fig 66. Total catch .................................................................................... 71 Fig 67. Density/100m² .............................................................................. 71 Fig 68. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon caught n = 61 ... 72 Fig 69. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 22 ................... 72 Fig 70. Length frequency distribution for all salmon caught..................... 73 Fig 71. Length frequency distribution for all trout caught ........................ 73 3.92

Proposed Programme of Measures .................................................. 75

Fig 72. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Density estimates of the EQR variable ....... 76 4.0

OVERVIEW OF WFD FISH SURVEILLANCE RESULTS.................................. 77 Table 10. WFD fish surveillance stations surveyed by the Loughs Agency 2008-2017 ................................................................................................ 79 Fig 73. Loughs Agency WFD fish surveillance water body classifications 2017 Foyle area ................................................................................................ 80 Fig 74. Loughs Agency WFD fish surveillance water body classifications 2017 Carlingford area ....................................................................................... 81

5.0

SEMI QUANTITATIVE/SALMON MANAGEMENT PLAN CLASSIFICATIONS 82

6.0

CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... 82

Page 9 of 83

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Nine Water Framework Directive fish surveillance monitoring stations were surveyed within the Loughs Agency jurisdiction in 2017. All nine sites were within Northern Ireland. 22% of sites surveyed were classified as high status, 33% as good status and 45% as moderate status.

High 22%

Good Moderate Poor Bad

45%

33%

Classification in 2017 was completed using the WFD compliant classification tool, Fish Classification Scheme 2 Ireland (FCS2 Ireland) with the option of a professional judgement over ride. No results were over ridden using professional judgement in 2017. An overview of the classification system is provided and a synopsis of the survey data presented. Additional data and information has been presented in a series of excel spreadsheets and ESRI Arc GIS shape files. All data reported is stored within the Loughs Agency Geographical Information System (GIS) and is available upon request. Photographs of each site have been included and outline recommendations made for consideration as part of any programme of measures. Page 10 of 83

Due to high river levels throughout the 2017 survey season additional indicative classifications have not been derived for water bodies within the Foyle and Carlingford areas. A number of recommendations are made to ensure the continued success of Water Framework Directive river fish monitoring.

Page 11 of 83

1.0

INTRODUCTION

This report has been prepared to disseminate results for Water Framework Directive fish monitoring within the Foyle and Carlingford areas as managed by the Loughs Agency. The Loughs Agency reports this information to the Northern Ireland Environment Agency and the Environmental Protection Agency in Ireland. The report provides classifications for water bodies with surveillance monitoring stations within the Loughs Agency jurisdictions of the Foyle and Carlingford areas for 2017. Additional information has been provided in electronic format. WFD compliant fish surveys at surveillance stations are required under national and European law. Annex V of the WFD outlines that rivers are included within monitoring programmes and that the composition abundance and age structure of fish fauna are examined (Council of the European Communities, 2000). A synopsis of targeted Water Framework Directive river fish sampling within the Foyle and Carlingford areas has been provided below for fieldwork conducted in 2017. Other sites outside the Foyle and Carlingford areas have been monitored by the Agri Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) under contract to NIEA. Loughs Agency and AFBI have previously collaborated on a number of surveys to ensure continuity of sampling methods, no collaborative surveys were conducted in 2017.

2.0

BASIS FOR WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE FISH CLASSIFICATION

The Fish Classification Scheme 2 tool for Ireland (FCS2 Ireland) has been developed to classify fish fauna from high status to bad status in order to comply with Water Framework Directive requirements. FCS2 Ireland is a statistical model based on the Environment Agency (England) Fisheries Classification Scheme 2 (FCS2). FCS2 Ireland compares the observed abundance of fish of each species with a site specific prediction of the expected fish community under near undisturbed “reference conditions”. The predicted reference conditions are estimated using models created for each part of the UK and Ireland (UKTAG, 2013). Page 12 of 83

FCS2 Ireland was used for the first time within the Loughs Agency jurisdiction in 2012 to classify fish in rivers. This methodology is WFD compliant and has replaced professional opinion as the main method of classification. A professional opinion over ride can still be employed if deemed appropriate. Fish classifications will be incorporated into final surface water classifications. Data collection was conducted in the field during June, July, August and September 2017 and involved the use of a quantitative electrofishing methodology. Electrofishing is the preferred method for WFD surveillance monitoring of fish in rivers to obtain a representative sample of fish from each monitoring station. This method is compliant with the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) standards for assessing fish stocks in wadeable rivers (CEN, 2003). Quantitative electrofishing requires the netting off of a section of river using stop nets. Removal sampling is then conducted utilising electrofishing equipment with the numbers, age class and species of each fish being recorded for each pass. After an appropriate depletion has been achieved, which facilitates a density estimation to be made, all fish were returned alive to the river. Additional habitat variables were recorded and the exact sampling locations were recorded using a Trimble Juno hand held GPS unit. Professional judgement over ride can be utilised where classifications are deemed to be inaccurate due to the presence of barriers to migration downstream of the sampling stations. Consideration of this issue has not been incorporated into the FCS2 (Ireland) model at this time. Other scenarios for professional judgement over ride include significant deviation from expected classification and higher than normal water levels during survey.

Page 13 of 83

NURSERY AREA Grade 1

   

50 -80mm water depth 0.5 – 8% gradient Stable cobble/boulder substrate > or = 70% bed cover Providing adequate cover

Grade 2

Marginally outside grade 1 on one count only

Grade 3

Well outside grade 1 on one or more counts

Grade 4

Absent, deep, channelized, silty etc.

SPAWNING AREA Grade 1

   

Flow 300 – 600mm/sec Water depth 150 – 700mm 70% substrate 30-80mm diameter Gravel depth: Trout = 50-150mm Salmon = 200-500mm

Grades 2-4

Failing as for nursery habitat above

HOLDING AREA Grade 1

Grades 2-4

  

Depth minimum m ideally > or = 2m Suitable cover Bankside/substrate stability

Failing as for nursery habitat above

Table 1. Habitat classification based on Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland (Fisheries Division) advisory leaflet on the evaluation of habitat for salmon and trout

Page 14 of 83

Figure 1. WFD Fish surveillance river sites within the Foyle area, Northern Ireland and Ireland

Page 15 of 83

Fig 2. WFD fish surveillance river sites within the Carlingford area, Northern Ireland. There are no sites within Ireland in the Carlingford area.

Page 16 of 83

3.0

CLASSIFICATIONS

3.1

F10029 Mourne

River Mourne at Victoria Bridge WFD Fish Classification 2017

GBNI1NW010102074

MODERATE FISHING

Sal 0+

Sal 1+

Tro Tro Eel 0+ 1+

Lam- Stickleprey back

R. Min- Floun- S.L. Total Tro now der

Single Pass TOTAL

108

Table 2. Electrofishing sampling results

Fig 3. Site F10029 3.11

Results

Site F10029 was surveyed using a quantitative electrofishing method. This involved a single pass electrofishing method over a defined area. From this data, density estimates have been calculated for all species and age classes present. Page 17 of 83

Flounder

Stone Loach

Minnow

Stickleback

Lamprey

Rainbow Trout

Flounder

Stone Loach

Minnow

Stickleback

Lamprey

Eel

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon 1+

Salmon 0+

Species

Eel

Tot Salmonids

Tot Tro

Tot Sal

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon1+

Salmon 0+

No. of Fish/100m²

Number of Fish

Fig 4. Total catch

Fish Species

Fig 5. Density/100m²

Page 18 of 83

40 y = 1E-05x3.0004 R² = 0.9707

35 30

Weight (g)

25 20 15 10 5 0 0

100

120

140

160

Length (mm)

Fig 6. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon n = 43 140

y = 1E-05x2.9902 R² = 0.9974

120

Weight (g)

100

0 0

100

150

200

250

Length (mm)

Fig 7. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 14

Page 19 of 83

2013 2017

Frequency

[140-149]

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

Length (mm)

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[10-19]

[0-9]

Fig 8. Length frequency distribution for all salmon caught (this can be used to assess the presence of different age classes/cohorts) 2017 n = 43, 2013 n = 18 *Note 2017 survey was single pass electrofishing survey only. 5

2013 2017

Frequency

[210-219]

[200-209]

[190-199]

[180-189]

[170-179]

[160-169]

[150-159]

[140-149]

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[10-19]

[0-9]

Length (mm)

Fig 9. Length frequency distribution for trout caught 2017 n = 14, 2013 n = 1. * Note 2017 was single pass electrofishing survey only.

Page 20 of 83

This site is composed predominantly of grade 3 nursery habitat (70%) with grade 2 holding habitat (30%). The exact location is given in the spreadsheets supplied which provide grid references for upstream and downstream locations.

3.12

Proposed Programme of Measures

Within the waterbody, potential programmes of measures could include improved riparian land management in the form of stock proof fencing and native buffer zone creation. Treatment of riparian invasive species is required. At the waterbody level riparian invasive species particularly Himalayan balsam is a significant problem. Bank erosion as a result of trampling by cattle is also an issue within the waterbody. Litter is a problem within the water body with significant plastic and other waste forming “trash lines” in the riparian trees which catch debris in high water conditions. Page 21 of 83

Fig 10. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class

Page 22 of 83

3.2

F10045 Derg

Derg River at Crew Bridge WFD Fish Classification 2017

GBNI1NW010102095

GOOD FISHING Sal Sal 0+ 1+

Tro Eel 1+

Lamprey

Stickleback Minnows Stoneloach Total

Single Pass

167

TOTAL

167

Table 3. Sampling results

Fig 11. Site F10045 3.21

Results

Site F10045 was surveyed using a single pass quantitative electrofishing method. From this data minimum density estimates have been calculated for all species present. Page 23 of 83

Flounder

Stone Loach

Minnow

Stickleback

Flounder

Stone Loach

Minnow

Stickleback

Lamprey

Fig 12. Total catch Lamprey

Eel

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon 1+

Salmon 0+

Species

Eel

Tot Salmonids

Tot Tro

Tot Sal

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon1+

Salmon 0+

No. of Fish/100m²

Number of Fish

Fish Species

Fig 13. Density/100m²

Page 24 of 83

y = 7E-06x3.1284 R² = 0.9759

Weight (g)

0 0

100

120

140

250

300

350

Length (mm)

Fig 14. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon n = 49

450 y = 1E-05x3.0068 R² = 0.9959

400 350

Weight (g)

300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0

100

150

200

Length (mm)

Fig 15. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 8

Page 25 of 83

2011

2014

2017

Frequency

30 25 20 15 10 5 [140-149]

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[0-9]

[10-19]

Length (mm)

Fig 16. Length frequency distribution for salmon caught 2017 n = 49, 2014 n = 66, 2011 n = 90 * Note surveys were single pass electrofishing survey only. 5

2011 2014 2017

Frequency

[340-349]

[320-329]

[300-309]

[280-289]

[260-269]

[240-249]

[220-229]

[200-209]

[180-189]

[160-169]

[140-149]

[120-129]

[100-109]

[80-89]

[60-69]

[40-49]

[20-29]

[0-9]

Length (mm)

Fig 17. Length frequency distribution for trout caught. 2017 n = 8. 2014 n = 10 & 2011 n = 4. * Note surveys were single pass electrofishing survey only.

Page 26 of 83

This site is composed predominantly of grade 2 nursery habitat (70%) with grade 3 spawning habitat (15%) and grade 3 holding habitat (15%). Additional biological information is available in the spreadsheets provided.

Page 27 of 83

3.22

Proposed Programme of Measures

This water body generally has good channel structure. Flood banks are present throughout. Local impacts within this waterbody include the presence of Himalayan balsam and Japanese knotweed. Water crowfoot (Ranunculus penicillatis spp) is present at this site and is one of the primary habitat features for the rivers designation as an Area of Special Scientific Interest (ASSI) and Special Area of Conservation (SAC). There is evidence of some bank protection works which has the potential to disconnect the river from its natural floodplain. The surrounding land use is silage production and grazing with some arable crop rotation. Potential programmes of measure could include riparian fencing set back from the left hand bank and control of invasive species.

Page 28 of 83

Fig 18. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class

Page 29 of 83

3.3

F10049 Derg

Glendergan River at Sraghcumber WFD Fish Classification 2017

GBNI1NW010102067

HIGH FISHING

Sal 0+

Sal 1+

Tro 0+ Tro 1+ Eel

Lamprey

Minnows

Total

1st

TOTAL

Table 4. Sampling results

Fig 19. Site F10049 3.31

Results

Site F10049 was surveyed using a single pass quantitative electrofishing method. Prolonged high water precluded removal sampling over multiple passes. From this data minimum density estimates have been calculated for all species present.

Page 30 of 83

Flounder

Minnow

Stickleback

Lamprey

Eel

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon 1+

Salmon 0+

Flounder

Stone Loach

Species

Stone Loach

Minnow

Stickleback

Fish Species

Lamprey

Eel

Tot Salmonids

Tot Tro

Tot Sal

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon1+

Salmon 0+

No. of Fish/100m²

Number of Fish

Fig 20. Total catch

Fig 21. Minimum density estimate/100m2

Page 31 of 83

40 y = 3E-06x3.3135 R² = 0.9443

35 30

Weight (g)

25 20 15 10 5 0 0

100

120

140

160

Length (mm)

Fig 22. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic Salmon caught n = 30

70 y = 9E-06x3.0607 R² = 0.9804

Weight (g)

0 0

100

120

140

160

180

200

Length (mm)

Fig 23. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 19

Page 32 of 83

2010

2013 2017

Frequency

40 30 20 10

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[10-19]

[0-9]

Length (mm)

Fig 24. Length frequency distribution for all salmon caught 2017 n= 30, 2013 n = 47 & 2010 n =73 *Note 2017 and 2013 surveys were single pass electrofishing survey only, 2010 survey were multi method. 9

2010 2017

8 7

Frequency

6 5 4 3 2 1 180-189

170-179

160-169

150-159

140-149

130-139

120-129

110-119

100-109

90-99

80-89

70-79

60-69

50-59

40-49

30-39

20-29

10--19

0-9

Length (mm)

Fig 25. Length frequency distribution for all trout caught 2017 n= 19 & 2010 n = 6 *Note 2017 was single pass electrofishing survey only, 2010 survey was multi method.

Page 33 of 83

This site is composed of grade 2 nursery habitat (50%), grade 3 spawning habitat (20%) and grade 3 holding habitat (30%). Additional biological information is available in the spreadsheets provided.

Page 34 of 83

3.32

Proposed Programme of Measures

Access slipway at site, fly tipping adjacent to site. Potential programmes of measures could include riparian fencing to exclude livestock from the watercourse on the left hand bank, control of Himalayan balsam. Access for cattle to drinking water could be supplied by the installation of a pasture pump.

Page 35 of 83

Fig 26. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class

Page 36 of 83

3.4

F10101 Fairywater

Fairywater at Mullanatoomog WFD Fish Classification 2017

GBNI1NW010102041

MODERATE FISHING 1st

Sal Sal Tro Tro lamprey Stickle Minnow Stoneloach Total 0+ 1+ 0+ 1+ back 1 0 0 5 2 4 7 21 40

2nd

3rd

TOTAL

Table 5. Sampling results

Fig 27. Site F10101 3.41

Results

Site F10101 was surveyed using a multiple pass quantitative electrofishing method. From this data density estimates have been calculated for all species and age classes present. Page 37 of 83

Flounder

Stone Loach

Flounder

Stone Loach

Minnow

Number of Fish 20

Stickleback

Species

Stickleback

Lamprey

Eel

Lamprey

Trout 0+

Eel

Tot Salmonids

Tot Tro

Trout 1+

Salmon 1+

Tot Sal

Salmon 0+

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon1+

Salmon 0+

No. of Fish/100m²

60 53

6 0

Fig 28. Total catch

Fish Species

Fig 29. Density estimate/100m2

Page 38 of 83

y = 3E-06x3.3658 R² = 1

Weight (g)

0 0

100

120

140

Length (mm)

Fig 30. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon caught n = 2

250 y = 4E-05x2.7533 R² = 0.9991

Weight (g)

200

150

100

0 0

100

150

200

250

300

Length (mm)

Fig 31. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 6

Page 39 of 83

2011 2014

Frequency

2017

[140-149]

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[10-19]

[0-9]

Length (mm)

Fig 32. Length frequency distribution of all Salmon caught 2017 n = 2, 2014 n = 4 & 2011 n = 40 6

2011 2014

2017

Frequency

[0-9] [10-19] [20-29] [30-39] [40-49] [50-59] [60-69] [70-79] [80-89] [90-99] [100-109] [110-119] 120-129 130-139 140-149 150-159 160-169 170-179 180-189 190-199 200-209 210-219 220-229 230-239 240-249 250-259 260-269 270-279

Length (mm)

Fig 33. Length frequency distribution of all trout caught 2017 n = 5, 2014 n = 2 & 2011 n = 13

Page 40 of 83

This site is composed of grade 3 holding habitat (65%), and grade 3 nursery habitat (35%). This site lies within a major maintained channel. There is heavy trampling by cattle on the left and right hand bank. Heavy aquatic weed growth is evident at this site. Due to the poor quality habitat present at this site recruiting fish may pass quickly through this area.

3.42

Proposed Programme of Measures

Potential programmes of measures should include installation of stock proof fencing and pasture pump the control of riparian invasive species and potentially the introduction of rubble mats to improve the quality of available nursery habitat. Page 41 of 83

Page 42 of 83

Fig 34. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class

Page 43 of 83

3.5

F10128 Drumragh

Drumragh River at Car Park WFD Fish Classification 2017

GBNI1NW010102006

MODERATE FISHING

Sal 0+

Sal 1+

Tro 0+

Tro 1+

Stickleback

Single Pass

TOTAL

Minnow

Stoneloach

total

Table 6. Sampling results

Fig 35. Site F10128 3.51

Results

Site F10128 was surveyed using a single pass quantitative electrofishing method. From this data minimum density estimates have been calculated for all species and age classes present. Page 44 of 83

0 Stone Loach

Flounder

Minnow

Stone Loach

Minnow

Stickleback

Fig 36. Total Catch

Lamprey

Species Lamprey

Eel

Tot Salmonids

Trout 1+

Tot Tro

Tot Sal

Trout 0+

Trout 1+

Salmon 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon 0+

Number of Fish 25

Salmon1+

Salmon 0+

No. of Fish/100m²

30 26

9 4 6

0 2 0

Fish Species

Fig 37. Density estimate/100m2

Page 45 of 83

50 y = 7E-06x3.1339 R² = 0.9944

45 40

Weight (g)

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0

100

120

140

160

Length (mm)

Fig 38. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon caught n = 31 250 y = 6E-07x3.6105 R² = 0.9494

Weight (g)

200

150

100

0 0

100

150

200

250

Length (mm)

Fig 39. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 4

Page 46 of 83

2011

2014 2017

Frequency

[140-149]

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[10-19]

[0-9]

Length (mm)

Fig 40. Length frequency distribution for Salmon caught. 2017 n = 31, 2014 n = 59 & 2011 n = 64. *Note surveys were single pass electrofishing survey only. 2011

2014

2017

Frequency

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 [280-289]

[260-269]

[240-249]

[220-229]

[200-209]

[180-189]

[160-169]

[140-149]

[120-129]

[100-109]

[80-89]

[60-69]

[40-49]

[20-29]

[0-9]

Length (mm)

Fig 41. Length frequency distribution for Trout caught. 2017 n = 4, 2014 n = 6 & 2011 n = 26. *Note surveys were single pass electrofishing survey only.

Page 47 of 83

3.52

Proposed Programme of Measures

Potential programmes of measures should include the control of invasive species. The site is within a major maintained channel with concrete and earth flood banks. In channel habitat improvements could be conducted to improve the salmonid nursery habitat. Channel maintenance is limiting the productive capacity of this waterbody.

Page 48 of 83

Page 49 of 83

Fig 42. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class

Page 50 of 83

3.6

F10148 Faughan

Faughan River at Mobuoy Road WFD Fish Classification 2017

GBNI1NW020208259

MODERATE FISHING Sal 0+

Sal 1+

Trou Trou 0+ 1+

Eel

Single Pass

TOTAL

Lamprey

Minnow

Stoneloach

Total

Table 7. Sampling results

Fig 43. Site F10148 3.61

Results

Site F10148 was surveyed using a single pass quantitative electrofishing method. From this data minimum density estimates have been calculated for all species and age classes present. Page 51 of 83

Fish Species

Flounder

Stone Loach

Minnow

Flounder

Stone Loach

Minnow

Stickleback

Lamprey

Eel

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon 1+

Salmon 0+

Species

Stickleback

Lamprey

Eel

Tot Salmonids

Tot Tro

Tot Sal

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon1+

Salmon 0+

No. of Fish/100m²

Number of Fish

Fig 44. Total catch

Fig 45. Density/100m2

Page 52 of 83

50 y = 1E-05x3.0674 R² = 0.9325

Weight (g)

0 0

100

120

140

160

Length (mm)

Fig 46. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon caught n = 64

y = 3E-05x2.8356 R² = 0.9908

Weight (g)

0 0

100

120

140

Length (mm)

Fig 47. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 10

Page 53 of 83

2011 2014 2017

Frequency

20 15 10 5

[140-149]

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[10-19]

[0-9]

Length (mm)

Fig 48. Length frequency distribution for all salmon caught 2017 n = 64, 2014 n = 41 & 2011 n = 89. *Note surveys were single pass electrofishing survey only. 5

2011 2014 2017

Frequency

[210-219]

[200-209]

[190-199]

[180-189]

[170-179]

[160-169]

[150-159]

[140-149]

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[10-19]

[0-9]

Length (mm)

Fig 49. Length frequency distribution for all trout caught. 2017 n = 10, 2014 n = 7 & 2011 = 16. *Note surveys were single pass electrofishing survey only.

Page 54 of 83

This site is composed predominantly of grade 1 nursery habitat (70%) with grade 2 spawning habitat (20%) and grade 3 nursery habitat (10%). Additional biological information is available in the spreadsheets provided.

3.62

Proposed Programme of Measures

Potential programmes of measures could include control of invasive species and removal of litter from the waterbody. This site would merit reconnection with its floodplain. Page 55 of 83

Page 56 of 83

Fig 50. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class

Page 57 of 83

3.7

F10171 Roe

Roe River at Limavady WFD Fish Classification 2017

GBNI1NW020202018

GOOD FISHING

Sal 0+

Sal 1+

Trou 0+

Trou 1+

Eel

Lamprey Stickleback Minnows Total

Single Pass

201

TOTAL

201

Table 8. Removal sampling results

Fig 51. Site F10171 3.71

Results

Site F10171 was surveyed using a single pass quantitative electrofishing method. From this data minimum density estimates have been calculated for all species and age classes present. Page 58 of 83

Flounder

0 0

Flounder

Stone Loach

Minnow

Stickleback

Species Stickleback

Lamprey

Eel

Trout 1+

Tot Salmonids

Tot Tro

Tot Sal

Trout 0+

Salmon 1+

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon 0+

Number of Fish 70

Salmon1+

Salmon 0+

No. of Fish/100m²

20 21

7 0

Fig 52. Total catch

Fish Species

Fig 53. Density/100m²

Page 59 of 83

y = 2E-05x2.9364 R² = 0.9267

Weight (g)

0 0

100

120

140

160

Length (mm)

Fig 54. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic Salmon caught n = 90 300

y = 2E-05x2.949 R² = 0.9963

250

Weight (g)

200

150

100

0 0

100

150

200

250

300

Length (mm)

Fig 55. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 16

Page 60 of 83

2011 2014

2017

Frequency

25 20 15 10 5

[140-149]

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[10-19]

[0-9]

Length (mm)

Fig 56. Length frequency distribution for all Salmon caught. 2017 n = 90, 2014 n = 51 & 2011 n = 32. *Note surveys were single pass electrofishing survey only. 6

2011 2014 2017

Frequency

4 3 2 1

[0-9] [10-19] [20-29] [30-39] [40-49] 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 100-109 110-119 120-129 130-139 140-149 150-159 160-169 170-179 180-189 190-199 200-209 210-219 220-229 230-239 240-249 250-259 260-269 270-279 280-289

Length (mm)

Fig 57. Length frequency distribution for all Trout caught. 2017 n = 16, 2014 n = 3 & 2011 n = 5. *Note surveys were single pass electrofishing survey only.

Page 61 of 83

This site is composed of grade 2 spawning habitat (35%) with grade 2 holding habitat (35%) and grade 3 nursery habitat (30%). Additional biological information is available in the spreadsheets provided.

3.72

Proposed Programme of Measures

Potential programmes of measures could include control of invasive species, reconnection of the river to its floodplain and removal of litter from throughout the water body.

Page 62 of 83

Page 63 of 83

Fig 58. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class

Page 64 of 83

3.8

F10644 Carlingford

Kilbroney River at Newton Bridge WFD Fish Classification 2017

GBNI1NB060604041

GOOD FISHING

Salmon Salmon Trout 0+ 1+ 0+

Trout Sea 1+ trout

Eel

Flounder

Total

Single Pass

148

TOTAL

148

Table 8. Removal sampling results

Fig 59. Site F10644 3.81

Results

Site F10644 was surveyed using a single pass quantitative electrofishing method. From this data minimum density estimates have been calculated for all species and age classes present. Page 65 of 83

0 Flounder

Flounder

Stone Loach

Minnow

Fig 60. Total catch

Stickleback

Species

Stickleback

Lamprey

Eel

Eel/Elver

Sea trout

Tot Salmonids

Sea trout

Tot Tro

Trout 1+

Tot Sal

Trout 0+

Salmon 1+

Number of Fish 60

Trout 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon 0+

Salmon1+

Salmon 0+

No. of Fish/100m²

70 61

10 2

Fish Species

Fig 61. Density/100m²

Page 66 of 83

200 y = 2E-05x2.8825 R² = 0.9884

180 160

Weight (g)

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0

100

150

200

250

300

Length (mm)

Fig 62. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 121

2012 2017

Frequency

[240-249]

[230-239]

[220-229]

[210-219]

[200-209]

[190-199]

[180-189]

[170-179]

[160-169]

Length (mm)

[150-159]

[140-149]

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[0-9]

[10-19]

Fig 63. Length frequency distribution for all trout caught. 2017 n = 121, & 2012 n = 17 *Note 2017 was a single pass electrofishing survey, 2012 was a multiple pass quantitative electrofishing survey

Page 67 of 83

This site is composed predominantly of grade 2 nursery habitat (80%) with grade 1 holding habitat (10%) and grade 3 spawning habitat (10%). Additional biological information is available in the spreadsheets provided.

3.82

Proposed Programme of Measures

Potential programmes of measures could include the control of invasive species and the removal of litter from throughout the waterbody.

Page 68 of 83

Fig 64. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Bar charts of the probability of class

Page 69 of 83

3.9

F11335 Camowen

Camowen River at Cranny Bridge Picnic Area WFD Fish Classification 2017

GBNI1NW010108257

HIGH FISHING

Sal 0+

Sal 1+

Trout 0+

Trout 1+

Lamprey

Stickleback Stoneloach Total

Single Pass

130

TOTAL

130

Table 9. Removal sampling results

Fig 65. Site F11335 3.91

Results

Site F11335 was surveyed using a single pass quantitative electrofishing method. From this data a minimum density estimates has been calculated for all species and age classes present. Page 70 of 83

Flounder

Stone Loach

Minnow

Stickleback

Species

Lamprey

Eel

Tot Salmonids

Tot Tro

Trout 1+

Tot Sal

Trout 0+

Trout 1+

Salmon 1+

Trout 0+

Salmon 0+

Number of Fish 45

Salmon1+

Salmon 0+

No. of Fish/100m²

50 45

15 16

3 0 0

Fig 66. Total catch

Fish Species

Fig 67. Density/100m²

Page 71 of 83

y = 1E-05x3.0366 R² = 0.9862

Weight (g)

0 0

100

120

140

160

Length (mm)

Fig 68. Length weight relationship of all Atlantic salmon caught n = 61 120 y = 1E-05x2.9679 R² = 0.9006 100

Weight (g)

0 0

100

150

200

250

Length (mm)

Fig 69. Length weight relationship of all Trout caught n = 22

Page 72 of 83

2011 2014

2017

Frequency

30 25 20 15 10 5 [140-149]

[130-139]

[120-129]

[110-119]

[100-109]

[90-99]

[80-89]

[70-79]

[60-69]

[50-59]

[40-49]

[30-39]

[20-29]

[10-19]

[0-9]

Length (mm)

Fig 70. Length frequency distribution for all salmon caught. 2017 n = 61, 2014 n = 65 & 2011 n = 71. * Note surveys were single pass electrofishing surveys only. 12

2011

2014

2017

Frequency

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 [0-9] [10-19] [20-29] [30-39] [40-49] [50-59] [60-69] [70-79] [80-89] [90-99] [100-109] [110-119] [120-129] [130-139] [140-149] [150-159] [160-169] [170-179] [180-189] [190-199] [200-209] [210-219] [220-229] [230-239] [240-249] [250-259] [260-269] [270-279] [280-289] [290-299]

Length (mm)

Fig 71. Length frequency distribution for all trout caught. 2017 n = 22, 2014 n = 47 & 2011 n = 36 * Note surveys were single pass electrofishing surveys only.

Page 73 of 83

This site is composed of grade 2 nursery habitat (40%) with grade 2 holding habitat (40%) and grade 2 spawning habitat (20%). Additional biological information is available in the spreadsheets provided.

Page 74 of 83

3.92

Proposed Programme of Measures

Potential programmes of measures could include invasive species control, soft bank protection, bush/tree trimming, barrier easement/removal and water quality improvements.

Page 75 of 83

Fig 72. FCS2 (Ireland) output. Density estimates of the EQR variable

Page 76 of 83

4.0

OVERVIEW OF WFD FISH SURVEILLANCE RESULTS

The results for WFD river fish monitoring within the Loughs Agency areas for 2017 are outlined in the table below. In 2017 a total of nine WFD river fish surveillance monitoring stations were monitored. The nine sites were in Northern Ireland. Classifications are outlined in the figure below. FCS2 (Ireland) was the primary classification tool from 2012, prior to this classifications were based on professional opinion. No additional waterbodies were classified using FCS2 in 2017.

Page 77 of 83

Site Code

Catchment

F10086

Year of 1st Survey 2008

F10089

2009

Strule

Mod

Good

F10076

2009

Owenkillew

Good

Mod

Good

F10020

2009

Burndennet

Good

High

F10014

2009

Glenmornan

Mod

Good

Mod

F10626

2009

Newry

Mod

Good

F10644

2009

Killbroney

Mod

Poor

F10077

2009

Owenkillew

Good

F10763

2009

Skeoge

Poor

Mod

F10022

2010

Burndennet

Good

Mod

F10049

2010

Derg

Good

F10079

2010

Glenelly

Good

Mod

F10115

2010

Camowen

Good

F10170

2010

Roe

Good

F10029

2013

Mourne

Strule

2008

Classification 2009 2010 2011 2012

Good

2013

2014 2015 2016

2017

Mod

Poor Good

Poor

Mod High High Good

Mod Page 78 of 83

Site Code

Catchment

40B020400

Year of 1st Survey 2010

Bredagh

01M010100

2010

01S020200

2008

Classification 2009 2010 2011 2012

2013

2014 2015 2016

2017

N/A

Mod

Derg

N/A

Poor

2010

Finn

N/A

Mod

F10111

2011

Camowen

Good

High

F10045

2011

Derg

Good

High

Good

F10128

2011

Drumragh

Good

High

Mod

F10101

2011

Fairywater

Good

Mod

F10148

2011

Faughan

Good

Poor

Mod

F10072

2011

Owenkillew

Good

High

F10171

2011

Roe

Good

F10025

2012

Finn

Mod

High

F11204

2012

Newry

Mod

Good

High Good

Table 10. WFD fish surveillance stations surveyed by the Loughs Agency 2008-2017

Page 79 of 83

Fig 73. Loughs Agency WFD fish surveillance water body classifications 2017 Foyle area

Page 80 of 83

Fig 74. Loughs Agency WFD fish surveillance water body classifications 2017 Carlingford area

Page 81 of 83

5.0

SEMI QUANTITATIVE/SALMON MANAGEMENT PLAN CLASSIFICATIONS

No indicative classifications were derived from semi quantitative electrofishing surveys conducted in 2017 due to the poor weather, high water levels encountered and the resultant low number of sites surveyed. Outlined below is the set of rules for deriving indicative fish classifications for waterbodies in which annual semi quantitative/salmon management plan electrofishing surveys are conducted. Within the Foyle and Carlingford areas approximately 500 sites are semi quantitatively surveyed annually. The ability to derive indicative classifications greatly facilitates the ability to highlight pressures within specific waterbodies and can assist with the development of programmes of measures. The refined rules as of January 2013 are listed below. 1. Only use if there are a minimum of three sites per water body - suggest a minimum of the three largest rivers for which data is available – important to record the stations used. 2. Classify according to the dominant salmonid species within the water body where adequate historical data is available. 3. Classify if ≥ 66% of sites agree 4. Classify as Good or better, moderate or Poor or worse 5. Use the most recent years data

6.0

CONCLUSION

From 2012 classification has been predominantly based on the FCS2 (Ireland) model. This has replaced the professional opinion classification method as the dominant classification method. A professional opinion over ride exists to correct classifications based on a paucity of information including the presence of barriers downstream to a monitored site. The professional opinion override was not utilised in 2017. 2017 marked the third year in the second monitoring period/cycle of the Water Framework Directive. In 2017 a number of sites were surveyed using a single Page 82 of 83

pass electrofishing survey. When it was not possible to install stop nets due to excessive flow, depth and or width a single pass survey within a defined area was conducted. This approach was instead of the previously utilised multi method approach. The FCS2 (Ireland) tool has passed the intercalibration process and has now been fully adopted for use across the island of Ireland. Further refinements may be made to the model in the future to incorporate issues such as full consideration of barriers downstream and acceptance of different types of survey data. During the second cycle of the WFD more emphasis will be placed on reasons for waterbody failures and the development of appropriate programmes of measures to address these. This approach will involve wider utilisation of existing fisheries data sets, additional empirical data collection and expert analysis of this information. A degree of flexibility will need to be maintained in collecting and analysing fisheries data which can be utilised for WFD classification purposes. Early consultation on any potential developments to the FCS2 (Ireland) model should be encouraged through the relevant technical advisory group. A new ten minute timed single pass electrofishing methodology has been developed by Inland Fisheries Ireland to meet the requirements of WFD fish surveillance monitoring. It is recommended that this methodology should be trialled during the Loughs Agency 2018 WFD fish monitoring project.

REFERENCES CEN (2003) Water Quality – Sampling of Fish with Electricity. European Standard. Ref. No. EN14011:2000. Council of the European Communities (2000) Establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework (2000)/60/EC). Official Journal of the European Communities, 43, 1-73. UK Technical Advisory Group on the Water Framework Directive (2012) Proposed recommendations on biological standards, Consultation Page 83 of 83