Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis): recovery strategy and action plan, 2020 [proposed]

Official title: Recovery Strategy and Action Plan for the Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis) in Canada [Proposed]

Species at Risk Act

Recovery Strategy Series

Preface

The federal, provincial, and territorial government signatories under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk (1996) agreed to establish complementary legislation and programs that provide for protection of species at risk throughout Canada. Under the Species at Risk Act (S.C. 2002, c.29) (SARA), the federal competent ministers are responsible for the preparation of a recovery strategy for species listed as extirpated, endangered, or threatened and are required to report on progress five years after the publication of the final document on the Species at Risk Public Registry.

This document has been prepared to meet the requirements under SARA of both a recovery strategy and an action plan. As such, it provides both the strategic direction for the recovery of the species, including the population and distribution objectives for the species, as well as the more detailed recovery measures to support this strategic direction, outlining what is required to achieve the objectives. SARA requires that an action plan also include an evaluation of the socio-economic costs of the action plan and the benefits to be derived from its implementation.  It is important to note that the setting of population and distribution objectives and the identification of critical habitat are science-based exercises and socio-economic factors were not considered in their development. The socio-economic evaluation only applies to the more detailed recovery measures (that is, the action plan portion). 

The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans is the competent minister under SARA for the Silver Shiner and has prepared this recovery strategy and action plan, as per sections 37 and 47 of SARA. In preparing this recovery strategy and action plan, the competent minister has considered, as per section 38 of SARA, the commitment of the Government of Canada to conserving biological diversity and to the principle that, if there are threats of serious or irreversible damage to the listed species, cost-effective measures to prevent the reduction or loss of the species should not be postponed for a lack of full scientific certainty. To the extent possible, this recovery strategy and action plan has been prepared in cooperation with the Province of Ontario as per section 39(1) and 48(1) of SARA.

As stated in the preamble to SARA, success in the recovery of this species depends on the commitment and cooperation of many different constituencies that will be involved in implementing the directions set out in this recovery strategy and action plan and will not be achieved by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) or any other jurisdiction alone. The cost of conserving species at risk is shared amongst different constituencies. All Canadians are invited to join in supporting and implementing this recovery strategy and action plan for the benefit of the Silver Shiner and Canadian society as a whole.

Implementation of this recovery strategy and action plan is subject to appropriations, priorities, and budgetary constraints of the participating jurisdictions and organizations.

Acknowledgments

This recovery strategy and action plan was prepared by P.L. Wong (DFO), Peter Jarvis (DFO contractor), A. Boyko (DFO), J. Stacey (DFO), and S. Staton (DFO). DFO would like to thank the following organizations for their support in the development of this recovery strategy and action plan: the Ontario Freshwater Fish Recovery Team, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation, and Parks. Mapping was produced by Carolyn Bakelaar and Adriana Rivas Ruiz (DFO).

Executive summary

Silver Shiner was listed as threatened under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) in 2019. This recovery strategy and action plan is considered one in a series of documents for this species that are linked and should be taken into consideration together, including the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) status report (2011), a recovery potential assessment (DFO 2013), and possibly further action plans. Recovery has been determined to be biologically and technically feasible.

The Silver Shiner is a relatively large minnow that belongs to the carp and minnow family (Cyprinidae). The species is restricted to North America, being widely distributed in the east-central United States, while in Canada it is restricted to southwestern Ontario.

The Canadian range of Silver Shiner appears to be restricted to tributaries of lakes St. Clair, Erie, and Ontario. Within the Lake Erie drainage, the species has been found in the Grand River and some of its tributaries. In the Lake St. Clair drainage, it has been found in the Thames River and tributaries, and in the Lake Ontario drainage the species has been found in Bronte and Sixteen Mile creeks. In Canada, this species is threatened by many anthropogenic stressors, while being confined to a limited range comprising few populations.

The main threats facing the species are described in section 5 and include: contaminants and toxic substances, increases in turbidity, nutrient and sediment loading, as well as issues related to flow modification.

Population and distribution objectives establish, to the extent possible, the number of individuals and/or populations, and their geographic distribution, that is necessary for the recovery of the species. The population and distribution objectives for Silver Shiner are:

• Population objective: to ensure populations in the Grand River and tributaries, Thames River and tributaries, Bronte Creek, and Sixteen Mile Creek (and East Sixteen Mile Creek) demonstrate signs of reproduction and recruitment, and are stable or increasing, with low risk from known threats.
• Distribution objective: to maintain the species’ current distribution and restore its distribution in historically occupied reaches, where feasible and warranted, at the following locations:
  • Bronte Creek
  • Sixteen Mile Creek (including East Sixteen Mile Creek)
  • Grand River (including Conestogo and Nith rivers)
  • Thames River (including the Avon River, Black Creek, Dingman Creek, Fish Creek, Medway Creek, Middle Thames River, North Thames River, Oxbow Creek, South Thames River, Stoney Creek, Trout Creek, Whirl Creek, and Wye Creek)

A description of the broad strategies to be taken to address threats to the species’ survival and recovery, as well as research and management approaches needed to meet the population and distribution objectives are included in section 7.

For Silver Shiner, critical habitat (section 8) is identified to the extent possible, using the best available information, and provides the functions and features necessary to support the species’ life‑cycle processes and to achieve the species’ population and distribution objectives. This recovery strategy and action plan identifies critical habitat for Silver Shiner in Bronte Creek, Sixteen Mile Creek (including East Sixteen Mile Creek), the Grand River (including Conestogo and Nith rivers), and the Thames River (including the Avon River, Black Creek, Dingman Creek, Fish Creek, Medway Creek, Middle Thames River, North Thames River, Oxbow Creek, South Thames River, Stoney Creek, Trout Creek, Whirl Creek, and Wye Creek).

The action plan portion of this document provides the detailed recovery planning in support of the strategic direction set out in the recovery strategy section of the document. The action plan outlines what needs to be done to achieve the population and distribution objectives, including the measures to be taken to address threats and monitor recovery of the species, as well as the required measures to protect critical habitat. An evaluation of the socio-economic costs of implementing the action plan and the benefits to be derived from its implementation is provided in Section 9.

Recovery feasibility summary

The recovery of Silver Shiner is believed to be biologically and technically feasible. Recovery feasibility is determined according to four criteria outlined by the Government of Canada (2009)^{Footnote 1}:

1. Are individuals of the wildlife species that are capable of reproduction available now or in the foreseeable future to sustain the population or improve its abundance?
   
   Yes. Although spawning has not been directly observed, the species’ continued presence (as well as the existence of juveniles) indicates that reproducing populations exist in the Thames and Grand rivers, and Bronte and Sixteen Mile creeks. These populations could provide a basis for natural expansions and potential translocations or artificial propagation, if necessary.
2. Is sufficient suitable habitat available to support the species or could it be made available through habitat management or restoration?
   
   Yes. Suitable habitat is present at several locations with extant populations (for example, Thames and Grand rivers, and Bronte and Sixteen Mile creeks). At reaches with historical records, suitable habitat may be made available through current and proposed restoration efforts. For example, improved water quality and habitat management (through stewardship and Best Management Practices [BMPs]) could improve and expand the extent of suitable habitat.
3. Can significant threats to the species or its habitat be avoided or mitigated?
   
   Yes. Threats believed to pose a serious risk to Silver Shiner, such as sedimentation, nutrient and contaminant loading, can be mitigated through proposed recovery techniques. Through much of the Silver Shiner’s range, restoration and mitigation efforts are already underway. For example, improved water quality and habitat management (through stewardship and BMPs) could improve and expand the extent of suitable habitat.
4. Do recovery techniques exist to achieve the population and distribution objectives or can they be developed within a reasonable timeframe?
   
   Yes. Techniques to reduce identified threats (for example, BMPs to reduce sedimentation) and restore habitats are well known and have proven to be effective. If they are determined to be feasible and necessary, repatriations may be possible through captive rearing or adult transfers. Although these techniques have been successful for other freshwater cyprinids (for example, DeMarais and Minckley 1993) it is uncertain if they would work for Silver Shiner. There are no published studies on captive rearing for Silver Shiner.

Background

1. Introduction

The Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis) was listed as threatened under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) in 2019. This recovery strategy and action plan is part of a series of documents regarding Silver Shiner that should be taken into consideration together, including the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) status report (COSEWIC 2011 ) and the science advisory report from the recovery potential assessment (RPA) (Fisheries and Oceans Canada [DFO] 2013 ) , and possibly further action plans.

A recovery strategy is a planning document that identifies what needs to be done to arrest or reverse the decline of a species. It sets objectives and identifies the main areas of activities to be undertaken, while the action plan portion provides the detailed recovery planning that supports the strategic direction set out in the recovery strategy portion. Action planning for species at risk recovery is an iterative process. The implementation schedule (tables 4 to 6) in this recovery strategy and action plan may be modified in the future depending on the progression towards recovery.

The RPA is a process undertaken by DFO Science to provide the information and scientific advice required to implement SARA, relying on the best available scientific information, data analyses and modelling, and expert opinions. The outcome of this process informs many sections of the recovery strategy and action plan. For more detailed information beyond what is presented in this recovery strategy and action plan, refer to the COSEWIC status report and the RPA science advisory report.

2. COSEWIC species assessment information

3. Species status information

^a Refer to NatureServe 2019 for full definitions of NatureServe conservation status ranks

^b Refer to NatureServe 2019 for state-specific designations

Upon listing as a threatened species, the Silver Shiner became protected wherever it is found in Canada by section 32 of SARA:

“No person shall kill, harm, harass, capture or take an individual of a wildlife species that is listed as an extirpated species, an endangered species or a threatened species.” [subsection 32(1)]

“No person shall possess, collect, buy, sell or trade an individual of a wildlife species that is listed as an extirpated species, an endangered species or a threatened species, or any part or derivative of such an individual.” [subsection 32(2)]

Under section 73 of SARA, the competent minister may enter into an agreement or issue a permit authorizing a person to engage in an activity affecting a listed wildlife species, any part of its critical habitat or its residences.

4. Species information

4.1. Description

The Silver Shiner (figure 1) is a relatively large minnow that can grow to about 14 cm long. It has a silvery body with some blue or green iridescence, a dark stripe down the centre of the back and a long snout marked with two black crescents between the nostrils. Fins are transparent or white with no spots or other distinctive markings (COSEWIC 2011). The Silver Shiner can be distinguished from similar looking species such as the Rosyface Shiner (N. rubellus) and the Emerald Shiner (N. atherinoides) through: a) a dorsal fin that originates directly opposite the base of the pelvic fins; b) the presence of two black crescents between the nostrils; and, c) the presence of a black stripe along the back (DFO 2013).

4.2. Population abundance and distribution

4.2.1. Global distribution and population abundance

The Silver Shiner has a wide distribution across east-central North America (figure 2). It occurs mainly in the Ohio and Tennessee River drainages (COSEWIC 2011). It is found in northern Georgia and Alabama, north through Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, southeastern Michigan, and southwestern Ontario. To the east, it is found in southwestern New York, western Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, and North Carolina (COSEWIC 2011). In Canada, Silver Shiner is at its northern limit and is found only in Ontario. Globally, the species is considered secure (table 1) but reliable population estimates are rare. Silver Shiner is considered stable throughout much of its American range, where it is represented by a large number of subpopulations and locations (NatureServe 2019).

4.2.2. Canadian distribution and population abundance

Due to several factors (for example, lack of regular monitoring, frequent misidentification, and limited overall sampling effort), the population dynamics of Silver Shiner are poorly characterized in Canada. However, recent sampling efforts have helped to refine the understanding of the species’ range. Silver Shiner populations in Canada are restricted to southwestern Ontario in the watersheds of Lake St. Clair, Lake Erie, and Lake Ontario (figure 3). Specifically, populations have been found in the Grand River and some of its tributaries (Conestogo, Nith and Speed rivers; Laurel, Schneider, Silver, and Whitemans creeks), the Thames River and tributaries (Avon, North Thames, Middle Thames, and South Thames rivers; Black, Dingman, Fish, Medway, Oxbow, Stoney, and Trout creeks; Fanshawe Lake), Bronte Creek, and Sixteen Mile Creek (including East Sixteen Mile Creek) (Bouvier et al. 2013, DFO, unpubl. data; Upper Thames River Conservation Authority [UTRCA] unpubl. data). The species may potentially be present in the Saugeen River drainage as a single specimen, originally identified as a Rosyface Shiner, was collected there in 1956 (collection locality unknown) (Bouvier et al. 2013). Surveys conducted in the Saugeen River in 2005 and 2009 did not detect the species (Marson et al. 2009). Silver Shiner was also reported from Rogers and McKenzie creeks in the Grand River watershed; however, these records are erroneous and resulted from species code transcription errors (COSEWIC 2011).

Of the previously mentioned locations, several may be considered historical as Silver Shiner has not been observed in recent years. These include Fanshawe Lake (last known record 1988), Laurel Creek (1979), Saugeen River drainage (1956), Schneider Creek (1977), Silver Creek (1949), Speed River (1981), and Whitemans Creek (1982). The species’ extent of occurrence in Canada is less than 2% of its global extent of occurrence. Its area of occupancy is estimated to be 19.3 km (COSEWIC 2011). For further information on the distribution of Silver Shiner, refer to COSEWIC (2011) and Bouvier et al. (2013).

4.2.3. Population assessment

The status of Silver Shiner populations in Canada was assessed by Bouvier et al. (2013) (table 2). Populations were ranked in terms of their abundance and trajectory. Certainty assigned to each population status is reflective of the lowest level of certainty associated with population abundance or trajectory. Refer to Bouvier et al. (2013) for detailed methods used for the assessment of population status.

4.3. Needs of the Silver Shiner

Spawn to hatch: Spawning habitat for this species is not well known; it is possible that spawning occurs in relatively deep riffles in habitat similar to that used by other Luxilus and Nocomis species (COSEWIC 2011). Spawning is believed to occur in late May to mid-June when water temperatures are between 18.1 and 23.5°C (COSEWIC 2011). In Ontario, gamete evidence suggested spawning occurs from early to mid-June when water temperature was approximately 24°C (Bunt 2016).

Larval stage and young-of-the-year: There is little information available on the habitat needs of the larval stages of Silver Shiner. It has been reported that young-of-the-year (YOY) are most commonly associated with aquatic habitats with slower water than those preferred by adult fish (COSEWIC 2011). In the Grand River, YOY occupied gravel shoals with slower currents and warmer temperatures (Bunt 2016).

Adult: Silver Shiner generally prefers medium to large streams and rivers with moderate to fast flows and is associated with alternating pools and riffles or more turbulent regions below dams (COSEWIC 2011; Bouvier et al. 2013; Glass et al. 2016). Reported substrate types at Silver Shiner locations are variable and include cobble, gravel, sand, and silt (COSEWIC 2011; Glass et al. 2016). In the Grand River, Ontario, cobble was used most frequently in transitional habitat near backwater pools and areas adjacent to deep runs (Bunt 2016). Larger Silver Shiner occupied transition areas with heterogeneous and patchy habitat within backwater pools, runs and deep runs with cobble, often near areas influenced by groundwater seepage (Bunt 2016). In 2011, Glass et al. (2016) conducted targeted surveys throughout the Ontario range of the Silver Shiner to determine the species’ distribution and habitat use. Overall, they found that the species had a preference for sand and gravel substrates, water velocities of 0.25 to 0.49 m/s, and depths of 0.8 to >1 m. Additionally, Silver Shiner demonstrated a strong avoidance for areas of high velocity (>0.5 m/s) and shallow depths (<0.4 m). A review of 21 environmental factors influencing Silver Shiner distribution indicated that water depth was the most important variable associated with the occurrence of the species within a river reach; the presence of Silver Shiner was positively correlated with greater stream depth (Baldwin 1983; Glass et al. 2016). The thermal preferences and tolerances of this species are unknown (Bouvier et al. 2013). Silver Shiner has been captured in both clear and turbid waters (COSEWIC 2011; Bouvier et al. 2013) and it is unlikely that a relationship exists between water clarity and Silver Shiner occurrence (Baldwin 1983). For further information on the biology and habitat needs of Silver Shiner, refer to the RPA and the COSEWIC report.

Silver Shiner has been documented to feed primarily on insects, including juveniles and adults of aquatic species (COSEWIC 2011), which it obtains from both midwater and surface feeding strategies (Gruchy et al. 1973; Baldwin 1983; COSEWIC 2011); however, other prey items such as worms, crustaceans, and phytoplankton have also been documented within its stomach contents (COSEWIC 2011). In addition, Silver Shiner has been documented to leap from the water to feed on flying insects (Gruchy et al. 1973; Parker and Mckee 1980; Trautman 1981; Baldwin 1988), which may indicate that terrestrial species are also an important component of its diet. Research conducted in 2017 seems to support this; the stomach contents of 165 Silver Shiner were analyzed (in the summer and fall) and approximately 37% of the prey identified were of terrestrial origin, and 85% of stomachs examined contained one or more prey item of terrestrial origin (interestingly, a notable proportion of ants and wasps were found in ~14% of stomachs analyzed) (DFO and University of Waterloo, unpubl. data). Consequently, the inclusion of terrestrial insect species as a dietary component may suggest that riparian vegetation could be an important indirect habitat feature as it may function to facilitate the availability of these specific prey items.

Limiting factors: Natural factors that may limit the distribution of Silver Shiner include stream gradient (the species appears to avoid shallow, high-gradient [>0.49 m/s] areas), water depth, and water temperatures. Colder weather may reduce winter survival and spawning success (Baldwin 1983). Water depth was found to be the most important factor influencing the occurrence of the species at the site level, though there is some evidence that this association is strongest for adult individuals.

Naturally occurring cycles of prolonged drought may affect spawning as there is some evidence that spawning occurs in relatively deep riffles in habitat similar to that used by other shiners. Silver Shiner has been recorded from warm streams and water temperatures, which likely limits the northern extent of the range of the species (COSEWIC 2011).

5. Threats

5.1. Threat assessment

Bouvier et al. (2013) assessed threats to Silver Shiner populations in Ontario. Known and suspected threats were ranked with respect to threat likelihood and threat impact for each population, which were then combined to produce an overall threat status (table 3). A certainty level was also assigned to the overall threat status, which reflected the lowest level of certainty associated with either threat likelihood or threat impact. See Bouvier et al. (2013) and DFO (2013) for further details. Additional information is provided in the subsequent threat summaries. For more information on threats to Silver Shiner, refer to the COSEWIC report and the RPA.

5.2. Description of threats

5.2.1. Contaminants and toxic substances

With a high degree of urbanization within the range of Silver Shiner, along with a preponderance of agricultural activities in the Thames and Grand River watersheds, the threat of contaminants and toxic substances to this species is considerable (COSEWIC 2011). The most significant threats appear to be toxic spills (for example, fuel, oils, manure, chemicals), and chloride (from road salt). Toxic compounds may have several significant effects at the population level, including impaired reproduction, disruption of behaviour, decreased resistance to pathogens and disruption of embryonic development (for example, Benoit et al. 1976; Collier et al. 1998; Hopkins et al. 2000; Hopkins et al. 2003).

Toxic spills are particularly common in southwestern Ontario and numerous manure spills have resulted in fish kills (COSEWIC 2011). The range of Silver Shiner is within Canada's most road-dense and heavily salted region, which can result in salinization of surface waters. With lampricide currently being applied in Bronte Creek every three years to control Sea Lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) populations (COSEWIC 2011), the level of impact on Silver Shiner needs further investigation. Other concerns include possible endocrine and reproductive effects on the Silver Shiner from contaminants contained in municipal effluent (for example, Jobling et al. 2003; Nash et al. 2004; Lajeunesse et al. 2011). Overall, the effects of contaminants on the Silver Shiner are poorly characterized and understanding often relies on circumstantial evidence.

5.2.2. Nutrient loading

The dominance of agricultural and urban activities in the watersheds containing Silver Shiner results in concerns over nutrient loading. Nutrients in the form of nitrogen (that is, ammonia, nitrates, nitrites) and phosphorus enter the watershed via urban and agricultural runoff, tile drainage, and wastewater treatment plants. Increased nutrient levels can result in eutrophication, including potentially toxic blooms of cyanobacteria. Eutrophication may result in decreased dissolved oxygen levels and induce metabolic stress for aquatic organisms that can result in a negative impact on population levels (for example, Munn and Hamilton 2003). Reductions in nutrient loading and pollution from agricultural, urban and industrial sources have produced a slight increase in Silver Shiner abundance and distribution in Ohio since 1990 (Yoder et al. 2005).

5.2.3. Turbidity and sediment loading

Turbid environments may inhibit prey detection (for example, Sweka and Hartman 2003) and mating success (for example, Burkhead and Jelks 2001) in a variety of fish species, while increased sediment loads may reduce primary productivity, macroinvertebrate availability, egg survival, and quality of spawning habitat (for example, Wood and Armitage 1997). Direct evidence on the effects of increased turbidity and sediment loading on Silver Shiner is sparse but Silver Shiner declines were documented in the Little Miami River (Ohio) following increased levels of sedimentation associated with physical alteration of the streambed; however, these declines were only observed in the short term (Schubert et al. 1987, as cited in Reid and Anderson 1999). It is possible that Silver Shiner is more tolerant of high levels of suspended solids (that is, turbidity), compared to high levels of sediment deposition, as it has been found in both clear and turbid waters and there seems to be no relationship between turbidity levels and Silver Shiner occurrence.

Increased siltation and turbidity in Silver Shiner habitats is most likely the result of agricultural activities and urban development, including watercourse and shoreline hardening, and channelization activities. Monitoring in the Thames and Grand rivers indicates poor water quality conditions currently exist (for example, Taylor et al. 2004; Loomer and Cooke 2011). A negative impact on fish communities related to urbanization and agricultural activities has been observed in the Grand River (Fitzgerald et al. 1998; Wichert and Rapport 1998), while negative impacts on Silver Shiner populations due to siltation and turbidity have been reported in the United States (Miltner et al. 2004; Rasleigh 2004).

5.2.4. Barriers to movement

Dams and impoundments are common in the Grand and Thames River watersheds (over 200 dams), while additional barriers to movement of Silver Shiner include improperly designed and installed culverts resulting from land-use practices or storm events. Barriers to movement can restrict the species’ access to important habitat (for example, spawning areas) and limit the potential for rescue effect from neighbouring populations. Hydrological and ecological changes associated with the presence of barriers have contributed to the loss or reduction of migratory and smaller-bodied riverine fishes (for example, Li et al. 1987; Pringle et al. 2000).

Impoundments may alter key characteristics of rivers, including flow regimes, water temperature and material cycling. Dams may result in the creation of reservoirs, which may favour the invasion or introduction of species not native to the watershed (for example, Brown Trout [Salmo trutta]) and, consequently, result in degradation of native fish populations (for example, Quinn and Kwak 2003). Silver Shiner has been documented to have undergone local extirpation in the cold tailwaters of the Barren River Lake dam in Kentucky following its construction 13 years prior (Hoyt and Robison 1980). In the Grand River watershed, a decline in populations of fluvial-specialist fishes, as well as species dependent upon warm water temperature cues to elicit spawning activity has been observed following the construction of dams and impoundments that impede fluvial connectivity and migratory pathways (Spence and Hynes 1971; Fitzgerald et al. 1998; Reid 2004).

5.2.5 Flow modification

Flow modification may threaten Silver Shiner populations through alteration of current velocities and a reduction in water levels. Water management issues are known for the Grand River where current and projected water demands may exceed the amount of water that is available (Grand River Conservation Authority 2014). Precipitous water drawdowns related to flood control and low flow augmentation may strand individuals or alter flows, resulting in habitat that is no longer suitable for Silver Shiner (Bouvier et al. 2013). Consumptive water withdrawal activities are also prominent in the Bronte Creek and Sixteen Mile Creek watersheds. Water for recreational purposes (for example, golf course irrigation) is the greatest use of water in both watersheds, while dams and reservoirs as well as agricultural and industrial activities were recorded, but at much lower levels (Bouvier et al. 2013).

5.2.6. Invasive species

The threat of invasion by native and non-native species on native fishes may take a variety of forms including direct competition for space and habitat, food and spawning sites, trophic disruption, potential introductions of new parasites, and disease transmission.  Species that have invaded the range of Silver Shiner include: Greenside Darter (Etheostoma blennioides), Black Crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus), Central Stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum) (COSEWIC 2011), Round Goby (Neogobius melanostomus), and Sea Lamprey (Bouvier et al. 2013). These species may negatively affect Silver Shiner populations by preying on their eggs and competing for resources or nest space. Since its introduction, Round Goby has been implicated in the declines of a variety of native fish species (for example, Thomas and Haas 2004). Additional introductions of invasive species into these waters are most likely to occur through the movement of boats from infested areas, use of live baitfish or natural invasion of species introduced into the Great Lakes basin.

Stocking of non-native sportfishes: Since the 1940s, sportfishes have been stocked in waterbodies within the known range of Silver Shiner in the Grand River watershed. Since 1989, 20,000 to 25,000 Brown Trout have been stocked into the upper Grand River and this section of the river is now recognized as a world class Brown Trout fishing area (Portt et al. 2007; Bouvier et al. 2013). Brown Trout has also been stocked into the Conestogo River; over 200,000 trout were introduced to the river between 2003 and 2008 (Bouvier et al. 2013). Although there are no studies examining the effect of Brown Trout on Silver Shiner, predation by stocked sportfishes has been hypothesized to compound the negative impacts of habitat degradation on native fishes in the Grand River (Fitzgerald et al. 1998; Reid 2004). Additionally, research has indicated that native cyprinids are vulnerable to predation by Brown Trout (Penczak 1999; Nannini and Belk 2006) and declines in abundance of soft-rayed stream fishes (catostomids and cyprinids) has been associated with this introduced species (Garman and Nielsen 1982).

5.2.7. Incidental harvest

Silver Shiner is not a legal baitfish in Ontario (OMNRF 2013); however, fishery activities that indirectly harvest Silver Shiner have the potential to negatively impact population abundance. Of concern is the incidental bycatch of the species in commercial baitfish operations and during angler harvest of bait. The extent to which Silver Shiner is caught as bycatch during angler baitfish harvesting in Ontario is unknown. In contrast, the possibility of the bycatch of Silver Shiner during commercial harvests for live bait fisheries has been investigated (Drake and Mandrak 2014b). This research indicated that the potential bycatch of Silver Shiner is dependent on the harvest effort and strategy (gear type, site selection, sampling efficiency etc.) applied within habitats where the species is present. Drake and Mandrak (2014b) found that a relatively high probability of bycatch exists when sufficient effort is applied; however, the level of mortality incurred as a result of such capture events is currently unknown. Another study (Drake and Mandrak 2014a) investigated the presence of imperilled fishes within samples taken from baitfish dealers across southern Ontario in 2007 and 2008 (a cumulative total of 16,886 fishes). No Silver Shiner were detected within this study (only one imperilled species, River Redhorse [Moxostoma carinatum], was detected), which may suggest that the species is not frequently captured within baitfish harvests. However, should Silver Shiner be caught as bycatch, the ability of baitfish harvesters to sort and remove the species from target baitfishes is unknown, but likely to be low (especially if the Emerald Shiner is the target species) (Bouvier et al. 2013).  Bycatch remains a concern and should be considered a potential threat.

5.2.8. Climate change

Climate change is expected to have significant effects on aquatic communities of the Great Lakes basin through several mechanisms, including: increases in water and air temperatures, reductions in water levels, shortening of the duration of ice cover, increases in the frequency of extreme weather events, emergence of diseases and shifts in predator-prey dynamics (Lemmen and Warren 2004). It is anticipated that the effects of climate change will be widespread and should be considered a contributing factor impacting species at risk and their habitat. Not all of the effects of climate change will negatively affect species at risk; those species that are limited in their range by cool water temperature (for example, Silver Shiner) may expand their distribution northward provided that dispersal corridors of suitable habitat are available (Chu et al. 2005). As the effects of climate change on Silver Shiner are highly speculative, it is difficult to determine the impact that this will have on the populations and, as such, it was not included in the threats table (table 3). Current and anticipated implications of climate change on Silver Shiner require further assessment.

Recovery

6. Population and distribution objectives

Population and distribution objectives establish, to the extent possible, the number of individuals and/or populations, and their geographic distribution, that is necessary for the recovery of the species. The population and distribution objectives for the Silver Shiner are:

• Population objective:To ensure populations in the Grand River and tributaries, Thames River and tributaries, Bronte Creek, and Sixteen Mile Creek (and East Sixteen Mile Creek) demonstrate signs of reproduction and recruitment, and are stable or increasing, with low risk from known threats.
• Distribution objective: To maintain the species’ current distribution^{Footnote 2} and restore its distribution in historically occupied^{Footnote 3} reaches, where feasible and warranted^{Footnote 4}, in the following waterbodies:
  • Bronte Creek
  • Sixteen Mile Creek (including East Sixteen Mile Creek)
  • Grand River (including Conestogo and Nith rivers)
  • Thames River (including the Avon River, Black Creek, Dingman Creek, Fish Creek, Medway Creek, Middle Thames River, North Thames River, Oxbow Creek, South Thames River, Stoney Creek, Trout Creek, Whirl Creek, and Wye Creek)

The populations at these locations could be considered recovered when they have returned to historically estimated ranges and demonstrate signs of reproduction and recruitment throughout their distribution. More quantifiable objectives will be developed once necessary surveys and studies have been completed (refer to section 8.2 schedule of studies to identify critical habitat). As historically occupied reaches in the watersheds listed above are connected to currently occupied reaches, the intent is to restore the species’ distribution naturally (that is, through reducing threats and restoring areas with degraded habitat). Should natural re-colonization not occur, population augmentation and/or repatriation using wild stock and/or captive reared individuals may be investigated.

Recent modelling conducted by Young and Koops (2013) estimated that the minimum viable population size (MVP) for Silver Shiner is 780,000 adults, given a 10% chance of a catastrophic event occurring per generation. However, the implementation of such a target is difficult without also having information on population demographics and spatial distribution, habitat quality and a more complete understanding of the life history of the species. For example, with uncertainty over the maximum age of the species (there was evidence suggesting that it may be much higher than previously thought; however, Silver Shiner research conducted in 2017/2018 appears to support a shorter lifespan [that is, 3 or 4 years] [DFO and University of Waterloo, unpubl. data]), the MVP may be considerably lower than the above estimate, which assumes a three-year lifespan.

Much of the above information is largely lacking for Canadian populations of Silver Shiner. Hence, more confident objectives relating to MVP can be developed and further validation of model results determined as understanding of this species is improved.

Rationale: Very little is known about Silver Shiner and further information is required before the population and distribution objectives can be refined. Knowledge of population demographics (extent, abundance, trajectories and targets) is currently limited.

7. Broad strategies and general approaches to meet objectives

7.1. Actions already completed or currently underway

Actions that have been completed include surveys, recovery potential modelling (see Young and Koops 2013), and species at risk outreach sessions. Additionally, a baitfish primer has been completed that identifies the baitfish species of Ontario (Cudmore and Mandrak 2018). This primer has been made available to commercial bait harvesters, anglers and the general public via OMNRF offices, ServiceOntario offices and the DFO website, and includes Silver Shiner, with the intention of reducing its incidental harvest. Finally, in the last few years, many projects for shoreline and instream works have been redesigned as a mitigation approach in areas of Silver Shiner occurrence.

Single- and multi-species recovery strategies and management plans have been developed for a variety of fish and mussel species at risk in Ontario, the distributions of which partly overlap with Silver Shiner. Recovery teams for these species are currently engaged in the implementation of recovery actions within these watersheds that will benefit Silver Shiner, and include but are not limited to the following species:

• Redside Dace (Clinostomus elongatus)
• River Redhorse
• Gravel Chub (Erimystax x-punctatus)
• Northern Madtom (Noturus stigmosus)
• Eastern Sand Darter (Ontario populations) (Ammocrypta pellucida)
• Northern Brook Lamprey (Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence populations) (Ichthyomyzon fossor)
• Fawnsfoot (Truncilla donaciformis)
• Kidneyshell (Ptychobranchus fasciolaris)
• Lilliput (Toxolasma parvum)
• Rainbow (Villosa iris)
• Round Hickorynut (Obovaria subrotunda)
• Round Pigtoe (Pleurobema sintoxia)
• Threehorn Wartyback (Obliquaria reflexa)
• Wavyrayed Lampmussel (Lampsilis fasciola)

Ecosystem-based recovery strategies that include Silver Shiner are:

• Thames River Recovery Strategy (Thames River Recovery Team 2005)
• Recovery Strategy for Fish Species at Risk in the Grand River in Canada (Portt et al. 2007)

Conservation authorities (Conservation Halton, Lower Thames Valley, Upper Thames River, and Grand River) continue to play a vital role in stewardship and public education programs that have resulted in increased awareness of species at risk and improvements to habitat and water quality throughout the Silver Shiner range in Ontario.

7.2 Measures to be taken to implement the recovery strategy and action plan

Successful recovery of this species is dependent on the actions of many different jurisdictions. It requires the commitment and cooperation of the constituencies that will be involved in implementing the directions and measures set out in this recovery strategy and action plan.

This recovery strategy and action plan provides a description of the measures that provide the best chance of achieving the population and distribution objectives for Silver Shiner, including measures to be taken to address threats to the species and monitor its recovery, to guide not only activities to be undertaken by DFO, but those for which other jurisdictions, organizations and individuals have a role to play. As new information becomes available, these measures and the priority of these measures may change. DFO strongly encourages all Canadians to participate in the conservation of Silver Shiner by undertaking measures outlined in this recovery strategy and action plan.

Table 4 identifies the measures to be undertaken by DFO to support the recovery of Silver Shiner. Table 5 identifies the measures to be undertaken collaboratively between DFO and its partners, other agencies, organizations or individuals. Implementation of these measures will be dependent on a collaborative approach, in which DFO is a partner in recovery efforts, but cannot implement the measures alone. As all Canadians are invited to join in supporting and implementing this recovery strategy and action plan, table 6 identifies the measures that represent opportunities for other jurisdictions, organizations or individuals to lead for the recovery of the species. If your organization is interested in participating in one of these measures, please contact the Species at Risk Ontario and Prairie office.

Federal funding programs for species at risk that may provide opportunities to obtain funding to carry out some of the outlined activities include the Habitat Stewardship Program for Species at Risk, the Aboriginal Fund for Species at Risk, and the Canada Nature Fund for Aquatic Species at Risk.

The measures included in this recovery strategy and action plan to be implemented by DFO will be subject to the availability of funding and other required resources. As indicated in the tables below, partnerships with specific organizations will provide expertise and capacity to carry out some of the listed recovery measures. However, the identification of partners is intended to be advice to other jurisdictions and organizations and carrying out these actions will be subject to each group’s priorities and budgetary constraints.

^c “Priority” reflects the degree to which the measure contributes directly to the recovery of the species or is an essential precursor to a measure that contributes to the recovery of the species:

• “high” priority measures are considered likely to have an immediate and/or direct influence on the recovery of the species
• “medium” priority measures are important but considered to have an indirect or less immediate influence on the recovery of the species
• “low” priority measures are considered important contributions to the knowledge base about the species and mitigation of threats

^d Timeline reflects the amount of time required for the measure to be completed from the time the recovery strategy and action plan is published as final on the Species at Risk Public Registry

^e ”Priority” reflects the degree to which the measure contributes directly to the recovery of the species or is an essential precursor to a measure that contributes to the recovery of the species:

• “high” priority measures are considered likely to have an immediate and/or direct influence on the recovery of the species
• “medium” priority measures are important but considered to have an indirect or less immediate influence on the recovery of the species
• “low” priority measures are considered important contributions to the knowledge base about the species and mitigation of threats

^f MECP: Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks; LTVCA: Lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority; UTRCA: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority; CH: Conservation Halton; GRCA: Grand River Conservation Authority; FGR: Friends of the Grand River

^g “Priority” reflects the degree to which the measure contributes directly to the recovery of the species or is an essential precursor to a measure that contributes to the recovery of the species:

• “high” priority measures are considered likely to have an immediate and/or direct influence on the recovery of the species
• “medium” priority measures are important but considered to have an indirect or less immediate influence on the recovery of the species
• “low” priority measures are considered important contributions to the knowledge base about the species and mitigation of threats

^h LTVCA: Lower Thames Valley Conservation Authority; UTRCA: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority; CH: Conservation Halton; GRCA: Grand River Conservation Authority

7.3. Narrative to support the recovery planning and implementation tables

Recovery measures 1 to 3 (threat evaluation): Many of the threats (table 3) facing the Silver Shiner can be classified as widespread and chronic and represent general ecosystem threats affecting myriad other aquatic species (for example, see species listed in section 7.1). Efforts to remediate these threats will benefit many species in addition to Silver Shiner. Specific needs include defining tolerances to physical alterations (for example, susceptibility to changes in flow regimes and sedimentation rates). A variety of potential threats to Silver Shiner populations were identified in the COSEWIC report (COSEWIC 2011) and by species’ experts (Bouvier et al. 2013). The status, certainty and cumulative effects of these threats should be confirmed throughout the species’ distribution to ensure that appropriate and defensible recovery actions are undertaken. Continued appraisal of contaminant impacts on Silver Shiner is necessary as the establishment of causal links between a decline and specific contaminants has yet to be achieved.

The negative impacts of invasive species on Silver Shiner populations at multiple life stages will be investigated. This includes competition for food and space, loss of or alteration to critical habitat, as well as predation. Given the fact that new species (for example, Central Stoneroller, Black Crappie, and Round Goby) have already invaded and/or been introduced in all three watersheds where Silver Shiner occurs, it is critical to determine specifically how these new species are interacting with Silver Shiner. In addition, the potential negative impacts of non-native sport fishes (for example, Brown Trout and Rainbow Trout [Oncorhynchus mykiss]), requires further evaluation.

Recovery measure 5 (standardized population and habitat monitoring program): Sampling experiments to develop standardized methods to determine density and demographic information that will allow valid temporal analysis will be conducted. The fish monitoring protocol should consider the methodologies used in background survey work and provide guidance on the time of sampling and the types of biological samples that should be collected (for example, scales, length, weight). For example, Silver Shiner appears to be captured more effectively via seine as compared to electrofishing methods (Baldwin 1983). The use of a standardized sampling protocol will allow for increased comparability among locations and over time when implemented.

Recovery measure 6 (life-history characteristics): Determination of the life history of the Silver Shiner is required to inform critical habitat determination and allow for clear focus of recovery planning and actions. Of particular importance to improving modelling efforts designed to ascertain quantifiable recovery targets, is determination of fecundity, lifespan and survival rates during the first year. Research has been initiated that will characterize the life-spans of Silver Shiner (A. Drake, pers. comm. 2018), of which age estimates have varied greatly among interpreters of aging structures (that is, 3 years vs. 10+ years) (Bouvier et al. 2013). Early results from this research appear to support a shorter lifespan for Silver Shiner (that is, ~3 years) (DFO and University of Waterloo, unpubl. data).    

Recovery measure 7 (repatriations [artificial rearing and translocations]): The potential for supplementation as a tool for Silver Shiner recovery should natural re-colonization from currently occupied to historically occupied reaches not occur will be investigated. This might include the rearing of specimens within aquaculture facilities, or alternatively, the transfer of wild fish specimens from a stable donor population. Donor populations should be carefully selected to ensure that translocated individuals are likely to experience adequate fitness relative to their new environment.

Recovery measures 4, 8 to 10 (coordination of activities): Many of the threats affecting Silver Shiner populations are similar to those affecting other aquatic species. Therefore, efforts to remediate these threats should be done in close connection with other recovery teams and relevant groups to eliminate duplication of efforts. Similarly, working relationships with First Nation groups, municipal planners, wastewater treatment facility operators etc. will help to provide further protection and or restoration for Silver Shiner.

Recovery measures 11 to 13 (assessment): Key first steps in recovery planning are to determine the current distribution and estimate the abundance of Silver Shiner in Canada. Further sampling is required to better understand all known extant populations and to detect new records in areas with the greatest potential for Silver Shiner habitat (for example, other reaches of currently occupied river systems). Sampling in Fanshawe Lake, Fish, Laurel, Schneider, Silver, and Whitemans creeks, Saugeen River, Sixteen Mile Creek between the Queen Elizabeth Highway and Dundas Street, and upper portions of the Grand River, is required to ascertain the status of the species in these locations.

Recovery measures 15, 18 to 19 (stewardship, habitat improvement): Threats and habitat degradation present at extant sites should be evaluated to determine if they pose immediate or long-term risks of extirpation. Where specific habitat restoration activities or threat mitigation options are available, they should be pursued and monitored for success. In all likelihood, the Silver Shiner is sensitive to poor water quality. Supporting stewardship activities, such as planting, leaving riparian buffer strips, restricting livestock access to streams, preventing untreated or under-treated sewage or manure run-off into waterways, and minimizing chemical and fertilizer applications to lands adjacent to waterways, would maintain or improve water quality in Silver Shiner habitats. Best Management Practices (BMPs) represent a good tool to provide clear direction for improved methods of operation for industries, such as agriculture or forestry. To be effective, BMPs should target primary threats affecting currently occupied habitat and, in particular, critical habitat. Once threats have been evaluated for extant populations, the results will inform local stewardship programs for threat mitigation. As with other fishes, measures to improve habitat for Silver Shiner may include stewardship actions involving BMPs for agricultural properties (OMAFRA 2016) and residential properties (School of Environmental Design and Rural Development 2007) within the catchment areas of the critical habitat identified. The stewardship activities outlined here represent a non-exhaustive selection of activities that can be encouraged within these predominantly agricultural watersheds to help reduce the impacts of terrestrial practices on aquatic ecosystems.

Recovery measures 16 to 17, 20 (awareness): Public participation in the recovery process for Silver Shiner is essential as the primary threat to its populations result from diffuse non-point source inputs relating to the general agricultural and urban activities within these watersheds. Recovery cannot occur without the full participation of local citizens and landowners. This high priority action should occur prior to, or concurrent with, all subsequent communications and public outreach-type recovery activities, including any printed materials. Where appropriate, a multi-species communication approach will be applied to increase efficiency.

Various organizations have already undertaken public education efforts to prevent the further spread of invasive species. Duplicating efforts or competing for funding are counterproductive; instead, DFO will support and encourage the continuance of these education efforts as they also support Silver Shiner recovery.

8. Critical habitat

8.1. Identification of Silver Shiner critical habitat

8.1.1. General description of Silver Shiner critical habitat

Critical habitat is defined in SARA as “…the habitat that is necessary for the survival or recovery of a listed wildlife species and that is identified as the species’ critical habitat in the recovery strategy or in an action plan for the species.” [subsection 2(1)]

Also, SARA defines habitat for aquatic species as “… spawning grounds and nursery, rearing, food supply, migration and any other areas on which aquatic species depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life processes, or areas where aquatic species formerly occurred and have the potential to be reintroduced.” [subsection 2(1)]

For Silver Shiner, critical habitat is identified to the extent possible, using the best available information, and provides the functions and features necessary to support the species’ life‑cycle processes and to achieve the species’ population and distribution objectives.

It is unknown if the critical habitat identified in this recovery strategy and action plan is sufficient to achieve the species’ population and distribution objectives. The schedule of studies outlines the research required to acquire more detailed information about the critical habitat identified to achieve the species’ population and distribution objectives.

8.1.2. Information and methods used to identify critical habitat

Within the streams currently occupied by Silver Shiner, an ecological classification system was used in the identification of critical habitat. The OMNRF’s Aquatic Resource Areas (ARA) mapping was used as the base unit for defining stream reaches. ARAs are aggregations of stream segments with similar physical and biological characteristics. Therefore, if the species has been found in one part of an ARA, it would be reasonable to expect that it would be present in other spatially contiguous areas of the same stream segment. While ARA segments generally represented relatively homogenous habitat conditions, an exception was noted in the Thames River and Grand River. In the case of the Grand River, the very long ARA segment was broken at the point where stream gradient flattens out by using river gradient profiles to exclude the lower reaches of the river below Cayuga. In the Thames River, a single ARA segment extended from upstream of London down to Lake St. Clair. In this case, the segment was broken at Melbourne Road, as it is around this area that the physiography changes from a sand plain to a clay plain, resulting in habitat conditions that are less suitable for Silver Shiner.

Within all identified stream segments, the habitat consists of two elements. The first element includes bankfull stream width^{Footnote 5} within the ARA. The second element of habitat includes the meander belt width of the stream and associated riparian habitat that is a minimum of 30 m from the meander belt^{Footnote 6} (measured horizontally). The inclusion of the meander belt width and associated riparian habitat recognizes the naturally dynamic nature of riverine systems and the importance of riparian areas to highly sensitive stream ecosystems that support Silver Shiner.

8.1.3. Identification of critical habitat

Geographic information:

The areas delineated on the following maps (figures 4 to 8) represent the extent of critical habitat that can be identified at this time. Note that the areas delineated include the entire “bankfull” channel stream width as well as the meander belt and associated riparian habitat of 30 m width; the inclusion of the meander belt width and associated riparian habitat recognizes the naturally dynamic nature of riverine systems and the importance of riparian areas of highly sensitive stream ecosystems that support Silver Shiner. Stream channels move within the meander belt over time. This is consistent with science-based guidelines developed for guiding habitat rehabilitation in Great Lakes Areas of Concern, which recommend a minimum of 30 m of naturally vegetated adjacent lands on both sides of the stream (Environment Canada 2004). Over the long term, the meander belt and riparian zone are essential to the maintenance of instream habitat attributes required to support the needs of Silver Shiner.

For Silver Shiner, critical habitat is identified in Bronte Creek, Sixteen Mile Creek (including East Sixteen Mile Creek), Grand River (including Conestogo and Nith rivers), and the Thames River (including the Avon River, Black Creek, Dingman Creek, Fish Creek, Medway Creek, Middle Thames River, North Thames River, Oxbow Creek, South Thames River, Stoney Creek, Trout Creek, Whirl Creek, and Wye Creek) (figures 4 to 8).

The location(s) of the critical habitat’s functions, features, and attributes have been identified using the Bounding Box approach. This means that the critical habitat is not comprised of the entire area within the identified boundaries but only those areas within the identified geographical boundaries (table 7) where the described biophysical feature and the function it supports occur, as described in table 8. The Bounding Box (that is, the area within which critical habitat is found) includes all contiguous ARA segments from the uppermost stream segment with Silver Shiner records (current and historical) to the lower most stream segment with Silver Shiner records (current and historical). In some cases, there may be some smaller ARA segments between the uppermost and lowermost segments that do not contain Silver Shiner records but given their proximity to segments that do contain records they were included. Table 7 provides the geographic coordinates that situate the boundaries within which critical habitat is found for Silver Shiner; these points are indicated in figures 4 to 8. Explanations for the areas within which critical habitat is identified (the area) are provided below.

Note that permanent anthropogenic structures that may be present within the delineated areas are specifically excluded; it is understood that maintenance or replacement of these features may be required at times.^{Footnote 7}

Thames River and tributaries: The areas within which critical habitat is currently identified within the Thames River are described below; this represents a total river reach of approximately 360 km in length.

• North Thames River and tributaries (Whirl Creek, Black Creek, Avon River, Trout Creek, Fish Creek, Wye Creek, Stoney Creek, Medway Creek): In the North Thames River, beginning at Mitchell and continuing downstream to its confluence with the main stem of Thames River; in Whirl Creek, beginning at Hwy 8 and continuing downstream to its confluence with the North Thames River at the south end of the town of Mitchell; in Black Creek, beginning at Hwy 8, and continuing downstream to its confluence with the North Thames River; in the Avon River, beginning in the city centre of Stratford and continuing downstream to its confluence with the North Thames River; in Trout Creek, beginning approximately 0.6 km downstream of Wildwood Lake and continuing downstream to its confluence with the North Thames River; in Fish Creek, beginning at Perth Rd. 151 and continuing downstream to its confluence with the North Thames River; in Wye Creek, beginning approximately 0.5 km upstream of Fairview Rd., and continuing downstream to its confluence with the North Thames River; in Stoney Creek, beginning approximately 2 km downstream of Highbury Ave. N. and continuing downstream to its confluence with the North Thames River; and, in Medway Creek, beginning approximately at Richmond St., near the town of Arva, and continuing downstream to its confluence with the North Thames River.
• Thames River and tributaries (Oxbow Creek, Dingman Creek): In the Thames River, beginning at the Pittock Dam in Woodstock and continuing downstream to the south boundary of the Chippewa of the Thames First Nation Indian Reserve where it crosses Melbourne Road; in the Middle Thames River beginning approximately 3 km upstream of 27th Line and continuing downstream to the confluence with the Thames River; in Oxbow Creek, beginning just upstream of Coldstream Rd. and continuing downstream to its confluence with the Thames River; and, in Dingman Creek, beginning approximately 2 km upstream of Wonderland Rd. S. and continuing downstream to its confluence with the Thames River.

Grand River and tributaries: The areas within which critical habitat is currently identified within the Grand River and its tributaries are described below; this represents a total river reach of approximately 384 km in length.

• Grand River: In the Grand River, beginning at the Shand Dam at Lake Belwood and continuing downstream to the Town of Cayuga.
• Conestogo River: In the Conestogo River, beginning at Conestogo Dam and continuing downstream to its confluence with the Grand River.
• Nith River: In the Nith River, beginning in the town of New Hamburg and continuing downstream to its confluence with the Grand River.

Bronte Creek: The areas within which critical habitat is currently identified within Bronte Creek are described below; this represents a total river reach of approximately 31 km in length.

• Beginning just upstream of Guelph Line near Lowville Park, and continuing downstream to the outlet at Lake Ontario.

Sixteen Mile Creek and East Sixteen Mile Creek: The areas within which critical habitat is currently identified within Sixteen Mile Creek and East Sixteen Mile Creek is described below; this represents a total river reach of approximately 47 km in length.

• Sixteen Mile Creek: In Sixteen Mile Creek, beginning just upstream of Derry Rd. in Milton and continuing downstream to the outlet at Lake Ontario.
• East Sixteen Mile Creek: In East Sixteen Mile Creek, beginning approximately 3 km upstream of Derry Rd. and continuing downstream to the confluence with Sixteen Mile Creek.

The following critical habitat maps (figures 4 to 8) depict the areas within which critical habitat is found for the Silver Shiner. For the most up-to-date maps, please visit DFO’s aquatic species at risk map webpage.

To assist with identifying the boundaries within which critical habitat occurs, geo-referenced location points (P1, P2, P3, etc.; Decimal Degrees [WGS 1984]) have been added to the figures in addition to the red areas. Coordinates for these points can be found in table 7. For more information, refer to the legend of each map or DFO’s Aquatic species at risk map webpage.

ⁱ All coordinates obtained using map datum WGS84

^j Riverine habitats are delineated to the midpoint of channel of the uppermost stream segment(s) and lowermost stream segment

Biophysical functions, features, and attributes:

Table 8 summarizes the best available knowledge of the functions, features and attributes for each life stage of the Silver Shiner (refer to section 4.3 needs of the Silver Shiner for full references). Note that not all attributes in table 8 must be present in order for a feature to be identified as critical habitat. If the features as described in table 8 are present and capable of supporting the associated function(s), the feature is considered critical habitat for the species, even though some of the associated attributes might be outside of the range indicated in the table.

^k Function: A life-cycle process of the listed species taking place in critical habitat (for example, spawning, nursery, rearing, feeding and migration). The function informs the rationale for its protection. The identification of critical habitat must describe how the functions support a life process necessary for the survival or recovery of species at risk.

^l Feature: Every function is the result of a single or multiple feature(s), which are the structural components of the critical habitat. Features describe the essential structural component that provides the requisite function(s) to meet the species’ needs. Features may change over time and are usually comprised of more than one part, or attribute. A change or disruption to the feature or any of its attributes may affect the function and its ability to meet the biological needs of the species.

^m Attribute: Attributes are measurable properties or characteristics of a feature. Attributes describe how the identified features support the identified functions necessary for the species’ life processes. Together, the attributes allow the feature to support the function. In essence, attributes provide the greatest level of information about a feature, the quality of the feature and how the feature is able to support the life-cycle requirements of the species.

Studies to further refine knowledge on the essential functions, features, and attributes for various life stages of the Silver Shiner are described in section 8.2 (schedule of studies to identify critical habitat).

Summary of critical habitat relative to population and distribution objectives:

Using the best available information, critical habitat has been identified for Silver Shiner populations in the following watercourses (figures 4 to 8):

1. Thames River and tributaries
2. Grand River and tributaries
3. Bronte Creek
4. Sixteen Mile Creek and East Sixteen Mile Creek

These are areas that, based on current best available information, the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans considers necessary to partially achieve the species’ population and distribution objectives required for the survival and recovery of the species. Additional critical habitat may be identified in future updates to the recovery strategy and action plan.

8.2. Schedule of studies to identify critical habitat

Further research is required to refine the understanding of the functions, features and attributes of the currently identified critical habitat necessary to support the species’ population and distribution objectives and protect the critical habitat from destruction. This additional work includes the studies found in table 9.

ⁿ Timeline reflects the amount of time required for the study to be completed from the time the recovery strategy and action plan is published as final on the Species at Risk Public Registry.

^o Timelines are subject to change in response to demands on resources and/or personnel and as new priorities arise.

8.3. Examples of activities likely to result in the destruction of critical habitat

Under SARA, critical habitat must be legally protected from destruction within 180 days of being identified in a final recovery strategy or action plan. For Silver Shiner critical habitat, it is anticipated that this will be accomplished through a SARA Critical Habitat Order made under subsections 58(4) and (5), which will invoke the prohibition in subsection 58(1) against the destruction of the identified critical habitat.

The following examples of activities likely to result in the destruction^{Footnote 8} of critical habitat (table 10) are based on known human activities that are likely to occur in and around critical habitat and would result in the destruction of critical habitat if unmitigated. The list of activities is neither exhaustive nor exclusive and has been guided by the threats described in section 5. The absence of a specific human activity from this table does not preclude or restrict the Department’s ability to regulate that activity under SARA. Furthermore, the inclusion of an activity does not result in its automatic prohibition, and does not mean the activity will inevitably result in destruction of critical habitat. Every proposed activity must be assessed on a case-by-case basis and site-specific mitigation will be applied where it is reliable and available. Where information is available, thresholds and limits have been developed for critical habitat attributes to better inform management and regulatory decision making. However, in many cases knowledge of a species and its critical habitat’s thresholds of tolerance to disturbance from human activities are lacking and must be acquired.

In future, threshold values for some stressors may be informed through further research. For some of the above activities, BMPs may be enough to mitigate threats to the species and its habitat; however, in some cases, it is not known if BMPs are adequate to protect critical habitat and further research is required.

9. Evaluation of socio-economic costs and benefits of the action plan

SARA requires that the action plan component of the recovery document^{Footnote 9} (action plan) include an evaluation of the socio-economic costs of the action plan and the benefits to be derived from its implementation (SARA 49(1)(e), 2003). This evaluation addresses only the incremental socio-economic costs of implementing this action plan from a national perspective as well as the social and environmental benefits that would occur if the action plan were implemented in its entirety, recognizing that not all aspects of its implementation are under the jurisdiction of the federal government. It does not address cumulative costs of species recovery in general nor does it attempt a cost-benefit analysis. Its intent is to inform the public and to guide decision making on implementation of the action plan by partners.

The protection and recovery of species at risk can result in both benefits and costs. The Act recognizes that “wildlife, in all its forms, has value in and of itself and is valued by Canadians for aesthetic, cultural, spiritual, recreational, educational, historical, economic, medical, ecological and scientific reasons” (SARA 2003). Self-sustaining and healthy ecosystems with their various elements in place, including species at risk, contribute positively to the livelihoods and the quality of life of all Canadians. A review of the literature confirms that Canadians value the preservation and conservation of species. Actions taken to preserve a species, such as habitat protection and restoration, are also valued. In addition, the more an action contributes to the recovery of a species, the higher the value the public places on such actions (Loomis and White 1996; DFO 2008). Furthermore, the conservation of species at risk is an important component of the Government of Canada’s commitment to conserving biological diversity under the International Convention on Biological Diversity. The Government of Canada has also made a commitment to protect and recover species at risk through the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk. An estimate of the costs and benefits associated with this action plan are described below.

This evaluation does not address the socio-economic impacts of protecting critical habitat for Silver Shiner. Under SARA, DFO must ensure that critical habitat identified in a recovery strategy or action plan is legally protected within 180 days of the final posting of the recovery document. Where an Order will be used for critical habitat protection, the development of the SARA Critical Habitat Order will follow a regulatory process in compliance with the Cabinet Directive on Regulatory Management, including an analysis of any potential incremental impacts of the Critical Habitat Order that will be included in the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement. As a consequence, no additional analysis of the critical habitat protection has been undertaken for the assessment of costs and benefits of the action plan.

9.1. Policy baseline

The policy baseline consists of protection under SARA for Silver Shiner (the species was listed under SARA as threatened in 2019), along with continued protection under the federal Fisheries Act and Ontario’s Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA 2007). Further protections may be afforded to Silver Shiner and its habitat under other provincial legislation^{Footnote 10}.

The policy baseline also includes recovery measures that were implemented prior to and after Silver Shiner was listed under SARA. These recovery measures include recovery strategies and action plans for other freshwater species as well as multispecies ecosystem-based recovery programs discussed in section 7.1 of this report.

9.2. Socio-economic costs of implementing this action plan

The majority of the recovery activities identified in this action plan are short-term (2020 to 2022), medium-term (2022 to 2025), or ongoing. Most of these activities focus on research, monitoring, engagement, education, and management to reduce threats and to inform and promote species recovery. Some of the actions are one-time projects (for example, research), likely funded from existing federal government resources. Implementation of local stewardship actions would be supported by programs such as the Species at Risk Habitat Stewardship Program (HSP) and the Canada Nature Fund for Aquatic Species at Risk (CNFASAR). The highest cost component of this action plan is expected to be research activities related to threat evaluation. These costs are not expected to exceed $200,000 and are likely to be spread over four years. In addition, most programs require a level of direct or in-kind support costs from applicants as matching funds^{Footnote 11}. The costs (direct and in-kind) associated with these short-term actions are estimated to be low^{Footnote 12} and spread over the next five years^{Footnote 13}.

Costs would be incurred by the federal government to implement the activities listed in the action plan. In-kind costs, such as volunteer time, providing expertise and equipment, would be incurred as a result of implementing activities listed in the action plan. Costs (including in-kind support) could be incurred by the province of Ontario and conservation authorities.

Ongoing recovery activities will be developed through a cooperative approach following discussions between other agencies, levels of government, stewardship groups and stakeholders allowing for consideration of costs and benefits during the process.

9.3. Benefits of implementing this action plan

Some of the benefits of recovery actions required to ensure viable and stable populations of Silver Shiner and to return the species to its full historical distribution outlined in this action plan are difficult to quantify but are expected to be low and would occur over the long term. If implemented, local stewardship programs to improve habitat conditions and reduce threats within critical habitat could potentially help to improve habitat and water quality. Some unquantifiable non-market benefits may also result with the implementation of the recovery actions contained in the action plan. Recent research (Rudd et al. 2016) found that Canadian households had positive and significant willingness to pay values for recovery actions that led to improvements for little known species at risk in southern Ontario.

In the absence of information on biological outcomes of the measures identified in the action plan, it is not possible to estimate the incremental benefits that can be directly attributed to the implementation of the recovery measures.

9.4. Distributional impacts

Governments and conservation authorities are expected to incur the majority of costs of implementing the action plan. Partners who choose to participate in recovery measures will also incur costs ^{Footnote 14}.

The Canadian public will benefit from the implementation of the action plan through the protection and recovery of Silver Shiner populations, through the protection of the ecosystem, through the maintenance of biodiversity in Canada, and through increased scientific knowledge.

10. Measuring progress

The performance indicators presented below provide a way to define and measure progress toward achieving the population and distribution objectives. A successful recovery program will achieve the overall aim of recovering populations to a state where they are stable or increasing and demonstrably secure with low risk from known threats. Progress towards meeting these objectives will be reported in the report on the progress of recovery strategy implementation.

Performance indicators:

1. The continued presence of Silver Shiner throughout its current distribution by 2022
2. Population trajectories in Bronte Creek and Sixteen Mile Creek determined by 2027
3. Status of Silver Shiner in the Saugeen River confirmed by 2022
4. Silver Shiner detected in formerly unoccupied sites within historical range by 2031 (that is, evidence of expansion)

Reporting on the ecological and socio-economic impacts of the recovery strategy and action plan (under section 55 of SARA) will be done by assessing the implementation of the recovery strategy and action plan after five years. Many measures in this recovery strategy and action plan will increase our understanding of the species, its status, and the threats it faces, and over time will contribute to monitoring Silver Shiner in Canada. This monitoring information will be used to report on the performance indicators and progress towards recovery in future reports on the progress towards recovery strategy implementation. 

The broader ecological impacts of the implementation of this recovery strategy and action plan have been considered in its development. To report on the ecological impacts of implementation (under section 55 of SARA), monitoring data for other ecological components have been identified, and include water quality and quantity monitoring data for the watersheds where the species is found, where it exists. Additionally, other sensitive species with ranges that overlap that of Silver Shiner (for example, Eastern Sand Darter, Redside Dace) could be monitored to track their trajectories and to document changes to overall fish community composition and abundance. 

Reporting on the socio-economic impacts of the recovery strategy and action plan (under section 55 of SARA) will be done by collecting data on the costs incurred to implement it.

11. References

• Baldwin, M.E. 1983. Habitat use, distribution, life history, and interspecific associations of Notropis photogenis (Silver Shiner: Osteichthyes: Cyprinidae) in Canada, with comparisons with Notropis rubellus(Rosyface Shiner). Thesis (M.Sc.) Carleton University, Ottawa, ON. viii + 189 p.
• Baldwin, M.E. 1988. Updated status of Silver Shiner, Notropis photogenis, in Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 102: 147-157.
• Benoit, D.A., E.N. Leonard, G.M. Christensen, and J.T. Fiandt. 1976. Toxic effects of cadmium on three generations of Brook Trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 105(4): 550-560.
• Bouvier, L.D., B.S. Schroeder, and N.E. Mandrak. 2013. Information in support of a recovery potential assessment of Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis) in Canada. DFO Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Research Document 2012/130. iv + 33 p.
• Bunt, C.M. 2016. Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis) size-class structure, habitat utilization, movement and persistence in an urbanized fragment of a Great Lakes tributary. American Midland Naturalist 176: 200-209.
• Burkhead, N.M. and H.L. Jelks. 2001. The effects of suspended sediment on the reproductive success of a crevice-spawning minnow, the Tricolor Shiner (Cyprinella trichroistia). Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 130: 959-968.
• Chu, C., N.E. Mandrak, and C.K. Minns. 2005. Potential impacts of climate change on the distributions of several common and rare freshwater fishes in Canada. Diversity and Distributions 11: 299-310.
• Collier, T.K., L.L. Johnson, C.M. Stehr, M.S. Myers, and J.E. Stein. 1998. A comprehensive assessment of the impacts of contaminants on fish from an urban waterway. Marine Environmental Research 46(1): 243-247.
• COSEWIC. 2011. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Silver Shiner Notropis photogenis in Canada http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/cosewic/sr_silver_shiner_0911_eng.pdf. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xi + 45 p.
• Cudmore, B. and N.E. Mandrak. 2018. The baitfish primer - a guide to identifying and protecting Ontario's baitfishes. Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 39 p.
• DFO. 2008. Estimation of the economic benefits of marine mammal recovery in the St. Lawrence Estuary. Policy and Economics Regional Branch, Quebec 2008.
• DFO. 2013. Recovery potential assessment of Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis) in Canada. DFO Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Science Advisory Report 2012/068. 21 p.
• Drake, D.A.R. and N.E. Mandrak. 2014a. Ecological risk of live bait fisheries: a new angle on selective fishing. Fisheries 39(5): 201-211.
• Drake, D.A.R. and N.E. Mandrak. 2014b. Harvest models and stock co-occurrence: probabilistic methods for estimating bycatch. Fish and Fisheries 15(1): 23-42.
• Environment Canada. 2004. How much habitat is enough? A framework for guiding habitat rehabilitation in Great Lakes Areas of Concern (second edition). Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Ottawa, Ontario. 80 p.
• Fitzgerald, D.G., E. Kott, R.P. Lanno, and D.G. Dixon. 1998. A quarter century of change in the fish communities of three small streams modified by anthropogenic activities. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Stress and Recovery 6: 111-127.
• Garman, G.C. and L.A. Nielsen. 1982. Piscivority by stocked Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) and its impact on the nongame fish community of Bottom Creek, Virginia. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 39: 862-869.
• Glass, W.R., R. Gaspardy, J. Barnucz, L.D. Bouvier, and N.E. Mandrak. 2016. Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis) in Ontario: distribution and habitat use. Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 3105. 27 p.
• Grand River Conservation Authority. 2014. Grand River Watershed Management Plan https://www.grandriver.ca/en/our-watershed/resources/Documents/WMP/Water_WMP_Plan_Complete.pdf. Prepared by the Project Team, Water Management Plan. Grand River Conservation Authority, Cambridge, ON. 137 p. + appendices. .
• Gruchy, C.G., R.H. Bowen, and I.M. Gruchy. 1973. First Records of the Silver Shiner, Notropis photogenis, from Canada. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 30(9): 1379-1382.
• Hopkins, W.A., J.W. Snodgrass, J.H. Roe, B.P. Jackson, J.C. Gariboldi, and J.D. Congdon. 2000. Detrimental effects associated with trace element uptake in Lake Chubsuckers (Erimyzon sucetta) exposed to polluted sediments. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 39(2): 193-199.
• Hopkins, W.A., J.W. Snodgrass, B.P. Staub, B.P. Jackson, and J.D. Congdon. 2003. Altered swimming performance of a benthic fish (Erimyzon sucetta) exposed to contaminated sediments. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 44(3): 0383-0389.
• Hoyt, R.D. and W.A. Robison. 1980. Effects of impoundment on the fishes in two Kentucky tailwaters. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 34: 307-317.
• Jobling, S., D. Casey, T. Rodgers-Gray, J. Oehlmann, U. Schulte-Oehlmann, S. Pawlowski, T. Baunbeck, A.P. Turner, and C.R. Tyler. 2003. Comparative responses of molluscs and fish to environmental estrogens and an estrogenic effluent. Aquatic Toxicology 65(2): 205-220.
• Lajeunesse, A., C. Gagnon, F. Gagné, S. Louis, P. Čejka, and S. Sauvé. 2011. Distribution of antidepressants and their metabolites in Brook Trout exposed to municipal wastewaters before and after ozone treatment – evidence of biological effects. Chemosphere 83(4): 564-571.
• Lemmen, D.S. and F.J. Warren. 2004. Climate change impacts and adaptation: a Canadian perspective. Natural Resources Canada: Ottawa, Ontario.
• Li, H.W., C.B. Schreck, C.E. Bond, and E. Rexstad. 1987. Factors influencing changes in fish assemblages of pacific northwest streams. Pages 193-202  In W.J. Matthews and D.C. Heins, editors. Assemblages and Evolutionary Ecology of North American Stream Fishes, Norman, OK.
• Loomer, H.A. and S.E. Cooke. 2011. Water quality in the Grand River watershed: current conditions and trends (2003-2008). Draft, October 2011. Grand River Conservation Authority. 174 p.
• Loomis, J.B. and D.S. White. 1996. Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis. Ecological Economics 18(3): 197-206.
• Marson, D., N.E. Mandrak, and D.A.R. Drake. 2009. Sampling of the fish communities in the Saugeen River watershed, 2005-2006. Canadian Manuscript Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2911: vii + 19 p.
• Miltner, R.J., D. White, and C. Yoder. 2004. The biotic integrity of streams in urban and suburbanizing landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 69: 87-100.
• Munn, M.D. and P.A. Hamilton. 2003. New studies initiated by the U.S. Geological Survey - effects of nutrient enrichment on stream ecosystems. U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-118-03. 4 p.
• Nannini, M.A. and M.C. Belk. 2006. Antipredator responses of two native stream fishes to an introduced predator: does similarity in morphology predict similarity in behavioural response? . Ecology of Freshwater Fish 15: 453-463.
• Nash, J.P., D.E. Kime, L.T.M. Van der Ven, P.W. Wester, F. Brion, G. Maack, P. Stahlschmidt-Allner, and C.R. Tyler. 2004. Long-term exposure to environmental concentrations of the pharmaceutical ethynylestradiol causes reproductive failure in fish. Environmental Health Perspectives 112(17): 1725-1733.
• NatureServe. 2019. http://www.natureserve.org/explorer/servlet/NatureServe?init=Species NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1., Arlington, Virginia. Accessed: March 2017.
• OMAFRA. 2016. Best management practice series. http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/environment/bmp/series.htm#12. (Accessed: December 2016)
• OMNRF. 2013. Ontario fishing regulations – permitted baitfish species.
• Available: http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/LetsFish/2ColumnSubPage/198684.html. (Accessed January 2014)
• OMNRF. 2014. 2014 Ontario recreational fishing regulations summary. 104 p.
• Parker, B. and P. Mckee. 1980. Rare, threatened, and endangered fish species of southern Ontario: status reports. Report submitted by Beak Consultants Limited to Department of Supply and Services, Department of Fisheries and Oceans and National Museum of Natural Sciences. 238 p.
• Penczak, T. 1999. Impact of introduced Brown Trout on native fish communities in the Pilica River catchment (Poland). Environmental Biology of Fishes 54: 237-252.
• Portt, C., G. Coker, and K. Barrett. 2007. Recovery strategy for fish species at risk in the Grand River in Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ottawa. 104 pp.
• Pringle, C.M., M.C. Freeman, and B.J. Freeman. 2000. Regional effects of hydrologic alterations on riverine macrobiota in the new world: tropical-temperate comparisons BioScience 50: 807-823.
• Quinn, J.W. and T.J. Kwak. 2003. Fish assemblage changes in an Ozark River after impoundment: a long-term perspective. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 132(1): 110-119.
• Rasleigh, B. 2004. Relation of environmental characteristics to fish assemblages in the upper French Broad River basin, North Carolina. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 93: 139-156.
• Reid, S.M. 2004. Post-impoundment changes to the Speed River fish assemblage. Canadian Water Resources Journal 29(3): 183-194.
• Reid, S.M. and P.G. Anderson. 1999. Review of the effects of sediment released during open-cut pipeline water crossings on stream and river ecosystems. Canadian Water Resources Journal 24: 23-29.
• Rudd, M.A., S. Andres, and M. Kilfoil. 2016. Non-use economic values for little-known aquatic species at risk: comparing choice experiment results from surveys focused on species, guilds, and ecosystems. Environmental Management 58: 476-490.
• School of Environmental Design and Rural Development. 2007. Rural land owner stewardship guide http://www.stewardshipmanual.ca/. University of Guelph. 217 p. (Accessed: December 2016).
• Spence, J.A. and H.B.N. Hynes. 1971. Differences in fish populations upstream and downstream of a mainstream impoundment. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 28: 45-46.
• Sweka, J.A. and K.J. Hartman. 2003. Reduction of reactive distance and foraging success in Smallmouth Bass, Micropterus dolomieu, exposed to elevated turbidity levels. Environmental Biology of Fishes 67: 341-347.
• Taylor, I., B. Cudmore, C. MacCrimmon, S. Madzia, and S. Hohn. 2004. Synthesis report for the Thames River recovery plan 6th draft. Upper Thames River Conservation Authority, Cambridge, ON. Prepared for the Thames River Recovery Team.
• Thames River Recovery Team. 2005. Recovery strategy for the Thames River aquatic ecosystem: 2005-2010. November 2005 draft. 146 p.
• Thomas, M.V. and R.C. Haas. 2004. Status of the Lake St. Clair Fish Community and Sport Fishery, 1996-2001. Fisheries Research Report 2067. Michigan Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Division. 52 pp.
• Trautman, M.B. 1981. The Fishes of Ohio with Illustrated Keys. Ohio State University Press, Columbus, Ohio. 782 p.
• Wichert, G.A. and D.J. Rapport. 1998. Fish community structure as a measure of degradation and rehabilitation of riparian systems in an agricultural drainage basin. Environmental Management 22: 425-443.
• Wood, P.J. and P.D. Armitage. 1997. Biological effects of fine sediment in the lotic environment. Environmental Management 21: 203-217.
• Yoder, C.O., E.T. Rankin, M.A. Smith, B.C. Alsdorf, D.J. Altfater, C.E. Boucher, R.J. Miltner, D.E. Mishne, R.E. Sanders, and R.F. Thomas. 2005. Changes in fish assemblage status in Ohio's non-wadeable rivers and streams over two decades. Pages 399-430 in Historical Changes in Large River Fish Assemblages of the Americas. American Fisheries Society Symposium 45.
• Young, J.A.M. and M.A. Koops. 2013. Recovery potential modelling of Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis) in Canada. DFO Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Research Document 2012/131. iv + 30 p.

Appendix A: effects on the environment and other species

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals (2010), the Species at Risk Act (SARA) recovery planning documents incorporate strategic environmental assessment (SEA) considerations throughout the document. The purpose of a SEA is to incorporate environmental considerations into the development of public policies, plans, and program proposals to support environmentally sound decision-making and to evaluate whether the outcomes of a recovery planning document could affect any component of the environment or achievement of any of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy’s goals and targets.

Recovery planning is intended to benefit species at risk and biodiversity in general. However, it is recognized that strategies may also inadvertently lead to environmental effects beyond the intended benefits. The planning process based on national guidelines directly incorporates consideration of all environmental effects, with a particular focus on possible impacts upon non-target species or habitats. The results of the SEA are incorporated directly into the strategy itself, but are also summarized below in this statement.

This recovery strategy and action plan will clearly benefit the environment by promoting the recovery of the Silver Shiner. In particular, it will encourage the protection and improvement of riverine habitats. These habitats support species at risk from many other taxa (including birds, reptiles, mussels and plants) and thus the implementation of recovery actions for Silver Shiner will contribute to the preservation of biodiversity in general. The potential for these recovery actions to inadvertently lead to adverse effects on other species was considered. The SEA concluded the implementation of this document will clearly benefit the environment and will not entail any significant adverse environmental effects.

Appendix B: record of cooperation and consultation

Recovery strategies are to be prepared in cooperation and consultation with other jurisdictions, organizations, affected parties and others as outlined in the Species at Risk Act (SARA) section 39 and 48. Fisheries and Oceans Canada has utilized a process of species expert/subject matter expert review to seek input to the development of this recovery strategy and action plan. Information on participation is included below.

Jurisdictional Review

Affiliation

• Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
• Environment and Climate Change Canada
• Parks Canada Agency

In addition, consultation on the draft recovery strategy and action plan occurred through letters sent to potentially impacted Indigenous groups. Additional stakeholder, Indigenous, and public input will be sought through the publication of the proposed document on the Species at Risk Public Registry for a 60-day public comment period. Comments received will inform the final document.

*Important notice and disclaimer: DFO does not assume any responsibility for the quality of information, products or services listed in the Web sites provided above. Users should also be aware that information from external sources is available only in the language in which it was provided.