Westslope cutthroat trout COSEWIC assessment and status report: chapter 10

• Previous page
• Table of contents
• Next page

Existing Protection or Other Status

In Canada, the responsibility for the conservation and protection of all fishes lies with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans under the federal Fisheries Act (http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F-14/).

The federal government has delegated to the provinces (BC and Alberta) the authority to promulgate provincial regulations for the day-to-day management of the resource  A key component of this responsibility is the protection of fish and fish habitat. As an important sport fish, the harvesting of WCT are subject to fishing restrictions in BC (http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/fw/fish/regulations/intro.html) and Alberta (http://www.albertaoutdoorsmen.ca/fishingregs/index.html).  Additionally, WCT within National Parks receive protection under the National Parks Act, and measures such as a zero-possession limit in Banff and Kootenay National Parks, and the complete fishing closure of Dungarvan and Sofa creeks in Waterton Lakes National Park have been put in place for the conservation of the species (Peter Achuff, Parks Canada, Waterton Park, Alberta, personal communication 2006).

To enhance the level of protection and management of fisheries, several provincial acts have been developed in British Columbia and Alberta (http://www.canadianenvironmental.com/legislation/). In British Columbia (similar acts apply in Alberta), much of the legislation controlling the use of water is embodied in the British Columbia Water Act (http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat/W/96483_01.htm). Unfortunately, the act has never been able to provide for the adequate habitat requirements of fish in terms of ensuring adequate stream flows. Often, the issuance and control of water withdrawal licences has been conducted without proper hydrological budgeting or a scientific basis (Rosenau and Angelo 2003). Changes to the act and the introduction of the British Columbia Fish Protection Act in 1997 (http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat - /F/97021_01.htm) are expected to provide government agencies the means to more adequately protect critical streamflows for fish populations.

Neither of the acts has been fully implemented and the regulation of water licensing on small, ‘general’streams is still lacking, especially in streams flowing through privately owned lands (Rosenau and Angelo 2003; Ron Ptolemy, BC Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Victoria, BC, personal communication, 2004). Better identification and protection of WCT habitat is essential in all areas of the range. Such problems need to be addressed as the scope and nature of WCT habitat requirements and seasonal movements have obvious implications for long-term population viability (Hilderbrand and Kershner 2000). While the amount of habitat currently available to WCT in these areas appears to be adequate, its current level of protection may not (see, for example, Harper and Quigley 2000; G3 Consulting Ltd. 2000), and increased levels of compliance-monitoring are required to reach better performance with respect to No-Net-Loss policies in western Canada.

Currently, no populations are specifically protected in Canada although both subspecies of cutthroat trout in British Columbia are blue-listed as “vulnerable” (BC Conservation Data Centre 2003). In Alberta, the species, cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii), was assessed as “Secure” in 2000, and subsequently reassessed as “Undetermined” in 2003 (AB Ministry of Sustainable Resource Development, 2000; see also http://www.wildspecies.ca/). To date, the status of WCT (as a subspecies) has not yet been assessed in Alberta. Nationally in the United States, WCT are listed as imperiled in Idaho (S2), vulnerable in Montana (S3), vulnerable in Oregon (S3), critically imperiled in Wyoming (S1), and given an inexact numeric rank in Washington (S?). Globally, WCT are ranked by the Nature Conservancy as G4T3. The G4 ranking is defined as ‘apparently secure, uncommon but not rare’. The T-ranking refers to a taxonomic subunit (in this case, subspecies). WCT are ranked ‘vulnerable to extirpation or extinction’ (T3).

Westslope cutthroat trout were petitioned for protection under the US Endangered Species Act in 1997. In 2000, that listing was deemed unwarranted by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) but the ruling was appealed by conservation groups on the basis that the threat of hybridization to this subspecies had not been sufficiently determined.  Upon subsequent re-examination of the available genetic data (e.g., Allendorf et al. 2001, 2004, 2005; Shepard et al. 2003; Campton and Kaeing 2005), the USFWS decided in July 2003, not to list westslope cutthroat as “endangered” under the act at this time because of the uncertainties regarding the entity to be listed.