Northern sunfish (Lepomis peltastes): COSEWIC assessment and status report 2016

Photo of Northern Sunfish
Photo: Northern Sunfish © Konrad Schmidt, 2016

Northern Sunfish - Saskatchewan - Nelson River populations
Not at Risk
2016

Northern Sunfish - Great Lakes - Upper St. Lawrence populations
Special Concern
2016

Table of Contents

List of Figures

  • Figure 1. Northern Sunfish, Lepomis peltastes
  • Figure 2. Approximate global distribution of Northern Sunfish Lepomis peltastes
  • Figure 3. Canadian distribution of Northern Sunfish. Symbols indicate locations and dates of records.
  • Figure 4. Distribution of Northern Sunfish in northwestern Ontario (Saskatchewan-Nelson DU). Symbols indicate locations and dates of records.
  • Figure 5. Distribution of Northern Sunfish in southern Ontario and Québec (Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU). Symbols indicate locations and dates of records.

List of Appendices

  • Appendix 1: Northern Sunfish records from Ontario and Québec.
  • Appendix 2: Threats Calculator for Saskatchewan-Nelson DU.
  • Appendix 3: Threats Calculator for Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU.

Document Information

COSEWIC
Committee on the Status
of Endangered Wildlife
in Canada

COSEWIC logo

COSEPAC
Comité sur la situation
des espèces en péril
au Canada

COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows:

COSEWIC. 2016. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Northern Sunfish Lepomis peltastes, Saskatchewan - Nelson River populations and the Great Lakes - Upper St. Lawrence populations, in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xv + 51 pp. (Species at Risk Public Registry website).

Previous report(s):

Meredith, G.N. and Houston, J.J. P. 1987. COSEWIC status report on the Longear Sunfish Lepomis megalotis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 17 pp

Production note:

COSEWIC would like to acknowledge Tim Birt for writing the status report on the Northern Sunfish (Lepomis peltastes) in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada. This report was overseen and edited by John Post, Co-chair of the COSEWIC Freshwater Fishes Subcommittee.

Please note that the Northern Sunfish was assessed in 1987 under the name Longear Sunfish Lepomis megalotis.

For additional copies contact:

COSEWIC Secretariat
c/o Canadian Wildlife Service
Environment and Climate Change Canada
Ottawa, ON
K1A 0H3

Tel.: 819-938-4125
Fax: 819-938-3984
E-mail: COSEWIC E-mail
Website: COSEWIC

Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur le Crapet du Nord (Lepomis peltastes), populations de la rivière Saskatchewan et du fleuve Nelson et populations des Grands Lacs et du haut Saint-Laurent, au Canada.

Cover illustration/photo:

Northern Sunfish -- Cover photo courtesy of Konrad Schmidt.

COSEWIC Assessment Summary

Assessment Summary – May 2016

Common name
Northern Sunfish - Saskatchewan - Nelson River populations
Scientific name
Lepomis peltastes
Status
Not at Risk
Reason for designation
This is a small-bodied member of the sunfish family that inhabits shallow vegetated areas of warm lakes, ponds, and slow-flowing rivers. Though relatively rare, it is broadly distributed, and is subject to low threats.
Occurrence
Ontario
Status history
The species was considered a single unit and designated Not at Risk in April 1987. When the species was split into two separate units in April 2016, the "Saskatchewan - Nelson River populations" unit was designated Not at Risk.

COSEWIC Assessment Summary

Assessment Summary – May 2016

Common name
Northern Sunfish - Great Lakes - Upper St. Lawrence populations
Scientific name
Lepomis peltastes
Status
Special Concern
Reason for designation
This is a small-bodied member of the sunfish family that inhabits shallow vegetated areas of warm lakes, ponds, and slow-flowing rivers. Its spatial distribution is relatively small and likely patchy. It is suspected that the index of area of occupancy and abundance of the species has declined. Threats are variable across its range with some areas of declining habitat quality and other areas with improving habitat quality. Overall, the threats of siltation, contaminants, and invasive species were assessed as high. The species is likely to become Threatened unless these threats are effectively ameliorated.
Occurrence
Ontario, Quebec
Status history
The species was considered a single unit and designated Not at Risk in April 1987. When the species was split into two separate units in April 2016, the "Great Lakes - Upper St. Lawrence populations " unit was designated Special Concern.

COSEWIC Executive Summary

Northern Sunfish - Lepomis peltastes

Saskatchewan - Nelson River populations
Great Lakes - Upper St. Lawrence populations

Wildlife Species Description and Significance

Northern Sunfish is a small (length usually less than 13 cm), but otherwise typical, sunfish (Centrarchidae) with a deep, laterally compressed body. It has an upwardly angled opercular flap with a red/orange posterior margin. Breeding males are very colourful, having a reddish breast and bright blue wavy lines radiating posteriorly from the eye and opercle, often into the breast. Adult males retain juvenile characteristics including dark vertical bands and spotting on the dorsal and anal fins. A Northern Sunfish produces grunting sounds when courting. This can be an indicator of habitat quality because of its low tolerance of siltation and turbidity.

Distribution

In Canada, Northern Sunfish range includes northwestern Ontario, south and central Ontario, and southern Québec. In the United States, the Northern Sunfish occurs in Minnesota, eastern Wisconsin, northeastern Illinois, northern Indiana, northern Ohio, northwestern Pennsylvania, northwestern New York, and the lower peninsula of Michigan. Because Northern Sunfish is found in Canada in two National Freshwater Biogeographic Zones it is assessed as two designatable units.

Habitat

The species prefers shallow, vegetated areas of warm lakes, ponds, and slowly flowing watercourses. Northern Sunfish usually occurs in clear waters and is considered intolerant of siltation. Substrate usually consists of sand and gravel, as in the Thames River.

Biology

Northern Sunfish spawns during June and July. Eggs are deposited in a saucer-shaped depression in the substrate excavated by the male. Parental care lasts for a period of approximately 1 week and terminates when fry achieve the free swimming stage. Nesting is often colonial. The species is a generalist feeder, consuming mostly insects taken throughout the water column. It also eats small fishes and fish eggs. Northern Sunfish appears to disperse little and is considered a poor colonizer.

Population Size and Trends

Available data do not support quantitative estimates of abundance and population trends, although the species has never been considered common in Canada. Canadian occurrence records extend from 1924, but sampling has been sporadic and effort is often not known, particularly prior to 1995. Population declines are suspected in Québec and parts of southern Ontario because of habitat degradation. Very few Northern Sunfish have been collected in Québec since the early 1980s.

Threats and Limiting Factors

The most important threats, particularly for the Great Lakes – Upper St. Lawrence DU, include siltation and elevated levels of turbidity and contaminants emanating from agricultural and other forms of development. Less important and potential threats include invasive non-native species (particularly Round Goby), collection for the ornamental fish trade, and bycatch in the bait and recreational fisheries. The Saskatchewan-Nelson DU is threatened by invasive largemouth and smallmouth basses and Green Sunfish, whose ranges are expanding in northwestern Ontario. The most important limiting factor is probably the species’ low dispersal capacity, which slows recovery following depopulation and diminishes potential for population rescue. Northern Sunfish is also limited by low tolerance of turbidity.

Protection, Status, and Ranks

Northern Sunfish is not listed under the Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA) or the Ontario Endangered Species Act. In Québec, the species is included on the Liste des espèces susceptibles d’être désignées menacées ou vulnérables (list of wildlife species likely to be designated threatened or vulnerable) as mandated by the “Loi sur les espèces menacées ou vulnérables” (RLRQ, c E-12.01) (LEMV) (Act respecting threatened or vulnerable species) (CQLR, c E-12.01). Because sunfishes are considered sport fish, Northern Sunfish and its habitat are protected under the federal Fisheries Act. Northern Sunfish is not protected by federal legislation in the United States. Global NatureServe rank is Apparently Secure (G4). National rank in Canada is Vulnerable (N3) and in the United States the rank is Apparently Secure (N4). Subnational ranks in Canada are Imperilled (S2) in Québec and Vulnerable (S3) in Ontario. Northern Sunfish is not ranked in Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.

Technical Summary - DU1

Scientific Name:
Lepomis peltastes
English Name:
Northern Sunfish Saskatchewan-Nelson River populations
French Name:
Crapet du Nord Populations de la rivière Saskatchewan et du fleuve Nelson
Range of occurrence in Canada (province/territory/ocean):
Northwest Ontario and Saskatchewan-Nelson Basin in Ontario.

Demographic Information

Demographic Information of the species
Summary Items Information
Generation time (usually average age of spawners) 4 yrs
Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in number of mature individuals? No
Estimated percent of continuing decline in total number of mature individuals within [5 years or 2 generations] Unknown
[Observed, estimated, inferred, or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over the last [10 years, or 3 generations]. Unknown
Projected or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over the next [10 years, or 3 generations]. Unknown
[Observed, estimated, inferred, or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over any [10 years, or 3 generations] period, over a time period including both the past and the future. Unknown
Are the causes of the decline a. clearly reversible and b. understood and c. ceased? N/A
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of mature individuals? Unknown

Extent and Occupancy Information

Extent and Occupancy Information of the species
Summary Items Information
Estimated extent of occurrence 22,100 km²
Index of area of occupancy (IAO) (Always report 2x2 grid value).
208 km² (discrete)
>>2000 km2 (continuous)
208 km²
Is the population "severely fragmented" ie. is >50% of its total area of occupancy in habitat patches that are (a) smaller than would be required to support a viable population, and (b) separated from other habitat patches by a distance larger than the species can be expected to disperse?
  1. No
  2. No
Number of locations (use plausible range to reflect uncertainty if appropriate)
(Note: See Definitions and Abbreviations on COSEWIC website and IUCN (Feb 2014) for more information on this term.)

Many

>>10 using siltation and contaminants as principal threat

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] decline in extent of occurrence? No
Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] decline in index of area of occupancy? No
Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] decline in number of subpopulations? No
Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] decline in number of "locations"?
(Note: See Definitions and Abbreviations on COSEWIC website and IUCN (Feb 2014) for more information on this term.)
No
Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] decline in [area, extent and/or quality] of habitat?

Uncertain

Ranges of potential predators/competitors expanding.

Are there extreme fluctuations in number of subpopulations? No
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of "locations"?
(Note: See Definitions and Abbreviations on COSEWIC website and IUCN (Feb 2014) for more information on this term.)
No
Are there extreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence? No
Are there extreme fluctuations in index of area of occupancy? No

Number of Mature Individuals (in each subpopulation)

Number of Mature Individuals of the species
Population N Clones (index of Mature Individuals)
Subpopulations (give plausible ranges) N Mature Individuals
Northwestern Ontario Unknown
Total Unknown

Quantitative Analysis

Quantitative Analysis of the species
Summary Items Information
Probability of extinction in the wild is at least. Not Done

Threats (actual or imminent, to populations or habitats, from highest impact to least)

i. Invasive species (Green Sunfish and black basses are expanding ranges; severity of threat unknown)

Was a threats calculator completed for this species and if so, by whom? Yes, by John Post, Tim Birt, Nick Mandrak, Jim Grant, Scott Reid, Marc-Antoine Couillard
Moderator: Dwayne Lepitzki

Rescue Effect (immigration from outside Canada)

Rescue Effect of the species
Summary Items Information
Status of outside population(s) most likely to provide immigrants to Canada.

Possibly Declining

Erratic distribution in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Some recent extirpations in Wisconsin. Secure in Michigan.

Is immigration known or possible? Possible, but very unlikely
Would immigrants be adapted to survive in Canada? Probably
Is there sufficient habitat for immigrants in Canada? Yes
Are conditions deteriorating in Canada?

Possibly

Invasive native species are expanding ranges

Are conditions for the source population deteriorating? Yes
Is the Canadian population considered to be a sink? No
Is rescue from outside populations likely? No

Data-Sensitive Species

Data-Sensitive information of the species
Summary Items Information
Is this a data sensitive species? No

Status History

COSEWIC: The species was considered a single unit and designated Not at Risk in April 1987. When the species was split into two separate units in April 2016, the "Saskatchewan – Nelson River populations" unit was designated Not at Risk.

Status and Reasons for Designation:

Status:
Not at Risk
Alpha-numeric codes:
Not applicable
Reasons for designation:
This is a small-bodied member of the sunfish family that inhabits shallow vegetated areas of warm lakes, ponds, and slow-flowing rivers. Though relatively rare, it is broadly distributed, and is subject to low threats.

Applicability of Criteria

Criterion A (Decline in Total Number of Mature Individuals):
Not applicable. Population trends are unknown.
Criterion B (Small Distribution Range and Decline or Fluctuation):
Not applicable. Although the IAO is below the threshold for Endangered, the number of locations greatly exceeds the threshold and the population is not severely fragmented.
Criterion C (Small and Declining Number of Mature Individuals):
Not applicable. The number of mature individuals is unknown.
Criterion D (Very Small or Restricted Population):
Not applicable. The number of mature individuals is unknown.
Criterion E (Quantitative Analysis):
Not done.

Technical Summary - DU2

Scientific Name:
Lepomis peltastes
English Name:
Northern Sunfish Great Lakes - Upper St. Lawrence populations
French Name:
Crapet du Nord Populations des Grands Lacs et du haut Saint-Laurent
Range of occurrence in Canada (province/territory/ocean):
Southern Ontario and Southern Québec; Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence Basin

Demographic Information

Demographic Information of the species
Summary Items Information
Generation time (usually average age of spawners) 4 yrs
Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] continuing decline in number of mature individuals? Probably, inferred in Québec
Estimated percent of continuing decline in total number of mature individuals within [5 years or 2 generations] Unknown
[Observed, estimated, inferred, or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over the last [10 years, or 3 generations]. Unknown
Projected or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over the next [10 years, or 3 generations]. Unknown
[Observed, estimated, inferred, or suspected] percent [reduction or increase] in total number of mature individuals over any [10 years, or 3 generations] period, over a time period including both the past and the future. Unknown
Are the causes of the decline a. clearly reversible and b. understood and c. ceased?
  1. No
  2. Probably
  3. No
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of mature individuals? Unknown

Extent and Occupancy Information

Extent and Occupancy Information of the species
Summary Items Information
Estimated extent of occurrence 136,700 km²
Index of area of occupancy (IAO) (Always report 2x2 grid value).
764 km² (discrete)
>2000 km2 (continuous)
764 km²
Is the population "severely fragmented" ie. is >50% of its total area of occupancy in habitat patches that are (a) smaller than would be required to support a viable population, and (b) separated from other habitat patches by a distance larger than the species can be expected to disperse?
  1. No
  2. No
Number of locations (use plausible range to reflect uncertainty if appropriate)
(Note: See Definitions and Abbreviations on COSEWIC website and IUCN (Feb 2014) for more information on this term.)

Many

>>10 using siltation and contaminants as principal threat

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] decline in extent of occurrence?

Probably

Inferred in Québec

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] decline in index of area of occupancy?

Probably

Inferred in Québec

Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] decline in number of subpopulations? Possibly in Québec
Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] decline in number of "locations"?
(Note: See Definitions and Abbreviations on COSEWIC website and IUCN (Feb 2014) for more information on this term.)
Possibly in Québec
Is there an [observed, inferred, or projected] decline in [area, extent and/or quality] of habitat? Water quality deteriorating in some subwatersheds, improving in others.
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of subpopulations? No
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of "locations"?
(Note: See Definitions and Abbreviations on COSEWIC website and IUCN (Feb 2014) for more information on this term.)
No
Are there extreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence? No
Are there extreme fluctuations in index of area of occupancy? No

Number of Mature Individuals (in each subpopulation)

Number of Mature Individuals of the species
Population N Clones (index of Mature Individuals)
Subpopulations (give plausible ranges) N Mature Individuals
Southern/Eastern Ontario, Southern Quebec Unknown
Total Unknown

Quantitative Analysis

Quantitative Analysis of the species
Summary Items Information
Probability of extinction in the wild is at least. Not Done

Threats (actual or imminent, to populations or habitats, from highest impact to least)

  1. Siltation
  2. Contaminants
  3. Invasive species (Round Goby)

Was a threats calculator completed for this species and if so, by whom? Yes, by John Post, Tim Birt, Nick Mandrak, Jim Grant, Scott Reid, Marc-Antoine Couillard
Moderator: Dwayne Lepitzki

Rescue Effect (immigration from outside Canada)

Rescue Effect of the species
Summary Items Information
Status of outside population(s) most likely to provide immigrants to Canada.

Possibly Declining

Secure in Michigan.

Is immigration known or possible? Possible, but very unlikely
Would immigrants be adapted to survive in Canada? Probably
Is there sufficient habitat for immigrants in Canada? Yes
Are conditions deteriorating in Canada? Yes, in some subwatersheds; No, in others
Are conditions for the source population deteriorating? Yes
Is the Canadian population considered to be a sink? No
Is rescue from outside populations likely? No

Data-Sensitive Species

Data-Sensitive information of the species
Summary Items Information
Is this a data sensitive species? No

Status History

COSEWIC: The species was considered a single unit and designated Not at Risk in April 1987. When the species was split into two separate units in April 2016, the "Great Lakes – Upper St. Lawrence populations" unit was designated Special Concern.

Status and Reasons for Designation:

Status:
Special Concern
Alpha-numeric codes:
Not applicable
Reasons for designation:
This is a small-bodied member of the sunfish family that inhabits shallow vegetated areas of warm lakes, ponds and slow flowing rivers. Its spatial distribution is relatively small, and likely patchy. It is suspected that the index of area of occupancy and abundance of the species has declined. Threats are variable across its range with some areas of declining habitat quality and other areas with improving habitat quality. Overall, the threats of siltation, contaminants, and invasive species were assessed as high. The species is likely to become Threatened unless these threats are effectively ameliorated.

Applicability of Criteria

Criterion A (Decline in Total Number of Mature Individuals):
Not applicable. Population trends are unknown.
Criterion B (Small Distribution Range and Decline or Fluctuation):
Not applicable. Although the IAO is below the threshold for Endangered, the number of locations greatly exceeds the threshold and the population is not severely fragmented.
Criterion C (Small and Declining Number of Mature Individuals):
Not applicable. The number of mature individuals is unknown.
Criterion D (Very Small or Restricted Population):
Not applicable. The number of mature individuals is unknown.
Criterion E (Quantitative Analysis):
Not done.

Preface

The status of Northern Sunfish was assessed in 1987 (Meredith and Houston 1987). At that time, the taxon was considered to be a subspecies of Longear Sunfish, Lepomis megalotis; it has since been elevated to a full species (Page et al. 2013) which is assessed in this report.Northern Sunfish was designated Not at Risk due to its occurrence in numerous waterbodies in Ontario and Québec, although it was not considered to be abundant outside Quetico Park. Surveys conducted since 1987 indicate a larger Canadian range than was previously known; however, some concern exists regarding the status of populations in Québec. Sporadic and limited search effort prevents quantitative estimation of abundance trends, particularly in Québec, where the species is certainly rare.

COSEWIC History

The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) was created in 1977 as a result of a recommendation at the Federal-Provincial Wildlife Conference held in 1976. It arose from the need for a single, official, scientifically sound, national listing of wildlife species at risk. In 1978, COSEWIC designated its first species and produced its first list of Canadian species at risk. Species designated at meetings of the full committee are added to the list. On June 5, 2003, the Species at Risk Act (SARA) was proclaimed. SARA establishes COSEWIC as an advisory body ensuring that species will continue to be assessed under a rigorous and independent scientific process.

COSEWIC Mandate

The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) assesses the national status of wild species, subspecies, varieties, or other designatable units that are considered to be at risk in Canada. Designations are made on native species for the following taxonomic groups: mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fishes, arthropods, molluscs, vascular plants, mosses, and lichens.

COSEWIC Membership

COSEWIC comprises members from each provincial and territorial government wildlife agency, four federal entities (Canadian Wildlife Service, Parks Canada Agency, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and the Federal Biodiversity Information Partnership, chaired by the Canadian Museum of Nature), three non-government science members and the co-chairs of the species specialist subcommittees and the Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge subcommittee. The Committee meets to consider status reports on candidate species.

Definitions (2015)

Wildlife Species
A species, subspecies, variety, or geographically or genetically distinct population of animal, plant or other organism, other than a bacterium or virus, that is wild by nature and is either native to Canada or has extended its range into Canada without human intervention and has been present in Canada for at least 50 years.
Extinct (X)
A wildlife species that no longer exists.
Extirpated (XT)
A wildlife species no longer existing in the wild in Canada, but occurring elsewhere.
Endangered (E)
A wildlife species facing imminent extirpation or extinction.
Threatened (T)
A wildlife species likely to become endangered if limiting factors are not reversed.
Special Concern (SC)
(Note: Formerly described as "Vulnerable" from 1990 to 1999, or "Rare" prior to 1990.)
A wildlife species that may become a threatened or an endangered species because of a combination of biological characteristics and identified threats.
Not at Risk (NAR)
(Note: Formerly described as "Not In Any Category", or "No Designation Required.")
A wildlife species that has been evaluated and found to be not at risk of extinction given the current circumstances.
Data Deficient (DD)
(Note: Formerly described as "Indeterminate" from 1994 to 1999 or "ISIBD" [insufficient scientific information on which to base a designation] prior to 1994. Definition of the [DD] category revised in 2006.)
A category that applies when the available information is insufficient (a) to resolve a species' eligibility for assessment or (b) to permit an assessment of the species' risk of extinction.

The Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment and Climate Change Canada, provides full administrative and financial support to the COSEWIC Secretariat.

Wildlife Species Description and Significance

Name and Classification

Class:
Actinopterygii
Order:
Perciformes
Family:
Centrarchidae
English Name:
Northern Sunfish Saskatchewan-Nelson River populations
Scientific Name:
Lepomis peltastes
English Common Name:
Northern Sunfish
French Common Name:
Crapet du Nord

Historically, the taxonomic treatment of Northern Sunfish has been inconsistent. Some taxonomists (e.g. Gruchy and Scott 1966; Scott and Crossman 1973; Jennings 2013) considered the taxon to be a subspecies of Longear Sunfish (i.e. Lepomis megalotis peltastes;) while others (e.g. Trautman 1981; Bailey et al. 2004; Hubbs et al. 2004; Page and Burr 2011) ascribed it full species status (L. peltastes). Holm et al. (2010) treated populations in Ontario simply as L. megalotis. Northern Sunfish is presently considered to be a full species, distinct from Longear Sunfish (Page et al. 2013), which does not occur in Canada. In the northern U.S., the ranges of the two species do not overlap except in eastern Illinois, where Smith (1979) was unable to find intergrades and, perhaps, in northeast Ohio, where Trautman (1981) also found no intergrades. The two forms differ considerably in morphology (see following section). The Canadian range of Northern Sunfish lies within two major drainages: the Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence basin and the Saskatchewan-Nelson basin.

Morphological Description

A rather typical member of the genus Lepomis, Northern Sunfish has a deep, laterally compressed body (Figure 1). It can be distinguished from the similar Longear Sunfish, L. megalotis, by its smaller size (up to 17 cm in L. peltastes; 23.6 cm in L. megalotis) and shorter opercular flap, which angles upward and has a red/orange posterior margin (Bailey et al. 2004; Holm et al. 2010). Trautman (1981) noted differences in meristic characters, specifically, lateral line scales (35-37 in L. peltastes; 39-44 in L. megalotis) and pectoral fin rays (usually 13 in L. peltastes; 14 in L. megalotis). Adult male Northern Sunfish retain juvenile characteristics including dark vertical bands and spotting on the dorsal and anal fins (Trautman 1981). Breeding males are very colourful, having a reddish breast and bright blue wavy lines radiating posteriorly from the eye and opercle, often extending into the breast. Morphological differences between Northern Sunfish and Pumpkinseed (L. gibbosus), a superficially similar species native to Canadian waters, include more prominent red pigmentation on the opercular flap and dark spots on the dorsal and anal fins in the latter species (Holm et al. 2010).

Figure 1. Northern Sunfish, Lepomis peltastes
Photo of Northern Sunfish (see long description below)
Photo courtesy of Konrad Schmidt.
Long description for Figure 1

Photo of a Northern Sunfish (lateral view). This rather typical member of the genus Lepomis has a deep, laterally compressed body. It can be distinguished from the similar Longear Sunfish by its smaller size (up to 17 centimetres versus 23.6 centimetres) and shorter opercular flap, which angles upward and has a red to orange posterior margin. Adult male Northern Sunfish retain juvenile characteristics including dark vertical bands and spotting on the dorsal and anal fins. Males in breeding condition are among the most brilliantly coloured of North American fishes. 

Population Spatial Structure and Variability

No information is available regarding variation in Northern Sunfish across the Canadian portion of its range. A survey of allozyme variation in populations from Michigan, Wisconsin, and Illinois revealed low heterozygosity relative to Longear Sunfish populations sampled widely in the eastern U.S. Principal components analysis was not able to differentiate Northern and Longear Sunfishes based on allozyme variation (Jennings and Philipp 1992a). Scott and Crossman (1973) indicated there is little morphological variation across the Canadian range.

Special Significance

This species is too small to be commonly targeted by sport fishers. Males in breeding condition are among the most brilliantly coloured of North American fishes. Both sexes produce sound during the breeding season, presumably to attract mates (Gerald 1971; Hubbs et al. 2004). Due to its low tolerance of poor water conditions, Northern Sunfish is considered to be an indicator species of habitat quality (Jennings 2013).

Distribution

Global Range

The Canadian portion of the range of Northern Sunfish includes northwestern Ontario, southern and eastern Ontario, and southern Québec (Page and Burr 2011; Figure 2). In the United States, Northern Sunfish is distributed across northern Ohio, Indiana, northeastern Illinois, lower peninsula of Michigan, and eastern Wisconsin. A disjunct portion of the range occurs in north-central Minnesota; several additional disjunct, and likely relict, populations are present in southern Minnesota, central/western Wisconsin, southern Illinois and Iowa (extirpated in Iowa).

Figure 2. Approximate global distribution of Northern Sunfish Lepomis peltastes (dark blue). Range of the closely related Longear Sunfish L. megalotis is also shown (light blue). Adapted from Page and Burr (2011).
Map showing global distribution of Northern Sunfish. (see long description below)
Long description for Figure 2

. Map of the global distribution of the Northern Sunfish. The Canadian portion of the range includes northwestern Ontario, southern and eastern Ontario, and southern Quebec. In the United States, the Northern Sunfish is distributed across northern Ohio, Indiana, northeastern Illinois, the lower peninsula of Michigan, and eastern Wisconsin. A disjunct portion of the range occurs in north-central Minnesota; several additional disjunct populations are present in southern Minnesota, central/western Wisconsin, southern Illinois and Iowa (extirpated). 

Canadian Range and Designatable Units

Canadian populations of Northern Sunfish are concentrated in two geographic areas (Figure 3). In northwestern Ontario, Northern Sunfish is present in waters of the Nelson River watershed from Quetico Provincial Park westward through the Rainy River area to Lake of the Woods (Gruchy and Scott 1966; Scott and Crossman 1973). Records also exist from several sites in the vicinity of Lake of the Woods (Figure 4). A gap of approximately 800 km separates populations in northwestern Ontario from those in southern Ontario, where the species is present in waters flowing into Lake Huron, Georgian Bay, Lake St. Clair, Lake Erie, and Lake Ontario (Figure 5). In southern Ontario, the species is known from major watersheds including the Detroit, Thames, Sydenham, Ausable, Saugeen, Grand, Maitland, Trent, Moira, Ottawa, and St. Lawrence rivers. Recent records from the Trent River near Trenton, the Moira River, and lakes north of Kingston have narrowed the gap between populations in southern Ontario and eastern Ontario/Québec.

Figure 3. Canadian distribution of Northern Sunfish. Symbols indicate locations and dates of records.
Map showing Canadian distribution of Northern Sunfish. Symbols indicate locations and dates of records. (see long description below)
Long description for Figure 3

Map of the Canadian distribution of the Northern Sunfish in Ontario and Quebec, with symbols indicating localities and dates of records. 

Figure 4. Distribution of Northern Sunfish in northwestern Ontario (Saskatchewan-Nelson DU). Symbols indicate locations and dates of records.
Map showing Distribution of Northern Sunfish in northwestern Ontario (Saskatchewan-Nelson DU). Symbols indicate locations and dates of records.. (see long description below)
Long description for Figure 4

Map of the distribution of the Northern Sunfish in northwestern Ontario (Saskatchewan - Nelson River designatable unit), with symbols indicating localities and dates of records. 

Figure 5. Distribution of Northern Sunfish in southern Ontario and Québec (Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU). Symbols indicate locations and dates of records.
Map showing Distribution of Northern Sunfish in southern Ontario and Québec (Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU). (see long description below)
Long description for Figure 5

Map of the distribution of the Northern Sunfish in Ontario and Quebec (Great Lakes - Upper St. Lawrence designatable unit), with symbols indicating localities and dates of records.

In Québec, records are limited to tributaries of the St. Lawrence River from Delisle River to Lac St-Pierre (Figure 5). The majority of records from Québec are from the Châteauguay River and lower Outaouais River, with fewer records from the St. Lawrence River around Montréal and Lac St-Pierre. A single record from 1970 exists from Lac Brome (Yamaska River).

Previously, Northern Sunfish was not known from tributaries of Lake Ontario, hence, a gap separating southern Ontario populations from Québec populations was thought to exist (Meredith and Houston 1987). Sampling conducted since the last COSEWIC status update (Meredith and Houston 1987) has revealed populations in this area, particularly in the Moira River and nearby waters. The range is, therefore, more continuous between Québec and southern Ontario than was previously thought.

Designatable units (DUs) must satisfy criteria of discreteness and significance. An argument for discreteness of northwestern Ontario populations and those in southern Ontario and Québec can be made based on two factors. Firstly, northwestern Ontario populations occupy the Saskatchewan-Nelson River Freshwater Biogeographic Zone while populations in southern Ontario/Québec occupy the Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence Zone. Fish in the two areas likely have different postglacial dispersal histories (Meredith and Houston 1987; Mandrak and Crossman 1992). Habitat differences, and hence selective pressures, are more likely to be significant between rather than within biogeographic zones. Local adaptations may differentiate populations in the two biogeographic zones (although none is known). Secondly, the unoccupied 800 km gap separating these population clusters likely constitutes a barrier to gene flow.

The significance of the population clusters is less evident. Research on these populations is very limited, hence there is no evidence indicating genetic or ecologic differentiation, i.e. local adaptation has not been demonstrated. The wide disjunction between populations in northwestern Ontario and those in southern Ontario and Québec suggests different recolonization routes from refugial areas following the Wisconsinan glaciation. Canadian populations of Northern Sunfish are likely derived from the Mississippian Refugium; populations in northwestern Ontario likely dispersed through the Warren Route while those in southern Ontario and Quebec likely dispersed through the Chicago and Lower Peninsula of Michigan routes (Mandrak and Crossman 1992). Two DUs are recognized and named according to the biogeographic regions they now occupy, i.e. the Saskatchewan-Nelson DU (populations from northwestern Ontario) and the Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU (populations from southern Ontario and Québec). Although the significance of separate DUs is equivocal, recognizing them is consistent with treatment by COSEWIC of other freshwater organisms occupying this area (e.g. COSEWIC 2014).

Extent of Occurrence and Area of Occupancy

Using the minimum convex polygon method, the Canadian extent of occurrence (EOO) was determined to be 536,200 km2. The index of area of occupancy (IAO), calculated using the 2X2 km grid method, is 972 km2 (discrete measurement) or >>2000 km2 (continuous measurement). The discrete estimate of IAO includes the summed areas of grid squares containing Northern Sunfish records while the continuous estimate is based on summed areas of continuous stretches of watercourses between the grid squares containing records. For the Saskatchewan-Nelson DU, EOO is 22,100 km2 and IAO is 208 km2 (discrete) and >>2000 km2 (continuous). For the Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU, EOO is 136,700 km2 and IAO estimates are 764 km2 (discrete) and >>2000 km2 (continuous).

Discrete and continuous estimates of IAO are included as only rough approximations of minimum and maximum values, respectively. But both are likely overestimates of the area required for the most limiting life stage for this colonial nest-spawning fish species. Discrete values are clearly underestimates because Northern Sunfish almost certainly are present in grid squares within the range that were not sampled and therefore not counted. On the other hand, continuous estimates probably overestimate actual IAO values, because some fraction (potentially a large fraction) of grid squares representing watercourse areas in between squares that contain records do not support Northern Sunfish.

Continuous IAO estimates for both DUs are much greater than 2000 km2. Precise estimates were not made. Instead, grid squares within each DU were counted until the threshold value for quantitative criteria (i.e. 2000 km2) was reached. For the Saskatchewan-Nelson DU, continuous grid squares were counted for all watercourses except for Shoal Lake and Lake of the Woods. Because of the large sizes of these waterbodies, a complete count of grid squares would yield a continuous estimate of IAO much greater than 2000 km2. For the Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU, the 2000 km2 threshold was reached by summing grid squares from the Ausable, Maitland, Sydenham, and Thames rivers. Inclusion of the remaining areas within the range of the DU would have yielded an estimate far greater than 2000 km2.

Due to inconsistent sampling, quantitative comparisons of EOO and IAO through time are not possible. However, the small number of records from Québec combined with the intensity of sampling effort since the last COSEWIC Status Update (Meredith and Houston 1987) suggests that both measures of distribution may have declined. Despite considerable sampling effort throughout the Québec range (see Search Effort), recent records of Northern Sunfish exist only from the Châteauguay and Outaouais watersheds. IAO may also be declining in southern Ontario, especially in the upstream portions of the Thames, Grand, and Maitland rivers where most records date from before 1984 (Appendix 1).

Search Effort

Most, or all, records are derived from general fish surveys rather than targeted searches for Northern Sunfish. Since the previous COSEWIC Status Report, considerable search effort has been expended in Ontario by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) and Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) personnel (see COSEWIC 2013a). Similarly, in Québec, widespread sampling effort (mostly seining and electrofishing) has been undertaken, largely by the Réseau de Suivi Ichtyologique (RSI). The RSI network began in 1995 and has sampled much of the range of Northern Sunfish in Québec including Lac St-Pierre, Lac St-Louis, and Lac St-François over multiple years (outlined in COSEWIC 2013b and references therein). In recent years considerable effort over multiple years has also been expended in watersheds that are not known to support Northern Sunfish such as the St-François River (electrofishing surveys by Ministère de l’Environnement et de la Faune in 1993 and 2006) and the Richelieu River (see COSEWIC 2013b). Only 7 Northern Sunfish specimens have been reported from Québec since the previous COSEWIC Status Report: 5 from the Outaouais River and 2 from the Châteauguay River. Appendix 1 contains available Canadian records of Northern Sunfish from 1924 - 2014.

Habitat

Habitat Requirements

Northern Sunfish is most often found in shallow areas of warm lakes, ponds, and watercourses with little current. Vegetation is frequently present. Northern Sunfish is usually found in clear waters and is intolerant of turbidity and siltation (Smith 1979; Trautman 1981; Hubbs et al. 2004). Substrate usually consists of sand and gravel, as in the Thames River (Keenleyside 1978; Hall-Armstrong et al. 1996), although larger substrate material is typical in the Moira and Trent watersheds (Scott Reid, pers. comm.). Spawning occurs in shallow areas with sandy or gravel substrate (Holm et al 2010) and nursery areas consist of shallow areas with mixed vegetation and mineral substrate (Hall-Armstrong et al. 1996).

Habitat Trends

Habitat in northwestern Ontario is in remote and generally undeveloped areas including Quetico Provincial Park and is, therefore, generally stable. This contrasts with the situation in southern Ontario and Québec where habitat degradation has been widespread. In both areas, large-scale forest clearing (systematic clearing in southern Ontario began in the nineteenth century, Elliot 1998), development, and agricultural practices have resulted in serious water quality issues, notably siltation and elevated levels of turbidity and contaminants (e.g. Staton et al. 2003; Simoneau 2007; Berryman 2008). In recent years, habitat stewardship projects have been undertaken, mostly in southwestern Ontario, to encourage best management practices with the objective of reducing sediment and nutrient inputs from agricultural municipal sources (Erin Carrol, pers. comm. 2015). In Québec, some improvement in habitat quality has been achieved, including reduction of PCB concentrations in the Yamaska River (Berryman 2008). Regulations governing nutrient management and agricultural intensity may mitigate damage related to agriculture (BAPE 2003).

In Ontario, a network of 36 conservation authorities monitors watershed health and some disseminate results via report cards issued at 5-year intervals. Water quality criteria evaluated in report cards include levels of phosphorus and E. coli, and the diversity of benthic invertebrate communities. For example, the St. Clair Region Conservation Authority, which monitors 14 watersheds including the Sydenham River, reported in 2013 that total phosphorus in all watersheds exceeded provincial guidelines in all cases. Similarly, E. coli levels were higher than provincial guidelines in all but one monitored watershed. Overall water quality has improved over the last 5 years in three watersheds, held steady in seven watersheds, and deteriorated in two watersheds (SCRCA 2013). Over the same time interval, surface water quality reported by the Ausable Bayfield Conservation Authority remained stable (i.e. fair to poor) in most watersheds but improved in the Bannockburn and Main Bayfield watersheds (Brock and Veliz 2013). Between 2007 and 2012, the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority reported improving water quality in 12 watersheds, unchanged water quality in 16 watersheds, and no watershed with declining water quality (UTRCA 2012). Time-series data reflecting change in water quality in the Grand River watershed are not available as a report card; however, a water management plan documents familiar problems of elevated phosphate, nitrate, and turbidity, accompanied by low dissolved oxygen levels, particularly in central and lower regions of the watershed (Grand River Watershed Water Management Plan 2014). These inputs arise from point and nonpoint sources. While the number of watersheds that are experiencing improvement or deterioration in water quality is unavailable, the water management plan indicates that phosphate levels below wastewater treatment plants are substantially reduced relative to those recorded in the 1970s. Overall, it appears that Northern Sunfish habitat quality in southwestern Ontario, as indicated by total phosphorus, E. coli, and benthic invertebrate communities, is generally rated as fair or poor with some watersheds improving or holding stable and others deteriorating.

Biology

Life Cycle and Reproduction

Northern Sunfish spawns in June and July in Canada in typical sunfish fashion. Territorial males excavate roughly circular nests, often in colonies, in gravel or cobble substrate at a minimum water depth of 12 cm (Jennings and Philipp 1994). Spawning in Michigan occurs at temperatures above 23.3°C (Hubbs and Cooper 1935). Some females release all of their eggs in single nests while others divide their eggs across nests of several males (Jennings and Philipp 1992b). Adhesive eggs, approximately 1 mm in diameter are deposited in the nest and guarded by the male until hatching (3-5 days; Keenleyside 1978). Young are attended to for a few additional days until the yolk sac is absorbed and free swimming is achieved (Jennings 2013). Mature females produce 1,417 - 4,213 eggs (Carlander 1977).

Alternative reproductive tactics are employed by Northern Sunfish; territorial and small cryptically coloured sneaker males have been observed in the Thames River (Keenleyside 1972). Sneaker males gain fertilizations by entering the nests of larger territorial males and releasing sperm when females shed their eggs. In colonial breeding situations, territorial males may also “steal” fertilizations from neighbouring males. Goddard and Mathis (1997a) reported that prospecting females prefer males with larger opercular flaps.

Information on growth rates in Canadian populations is limited. A small study of fish sampled in 1995 from Mahon Lake in Quetico Provincial Park revealed a maximum age of 7 years and mean total length of 78 mm. Growth appears to slow considerably beyond age 2 years, at which time mean total length is 63 mm (Brian Jackson, pers. comm.). Hubbs and Cooper (1935) reported growth increments of 2.0-3.0 cm annually for the first 3 years in Michigan. Jennings (2013) reported similar findings in a small sample of 2- and 3-year-old fish from Beverly Lake in Wisconsin. Maturity is reached at 3-4 years of age and average length of 14 cm. The largest specimen reported by Scott and Crossman (1973) was 15 cm in length and maximum age is probably 8 years. Holm et al.(2010) reported a length of 17 cm for the largest specimen known from Ontario.

Female Northern Sunfish usually mature at 3 or 4 years of age (Jennings 2013). Mature males can be smaller (minimum 4.2 cm), especially individuals that adopt the sneaker life-history tactic. Very little information on longevity is available. The limited age distribution of the sample collected at Beverly Lake, Wisconsin, (n=26) suggests a short lifespan. Generation time (i.e. average age of spawners) is estimated to be 4 years.

Physiology and Adaptability

Little is known specifically about the physiology and adaptability of Northern Sunfish. It is active within a temperature range of 7-37.8°C and has little salinity tolerance (Carlander 1977). It is intolerant of siltation and has disappeared from many sites in Ohio, particularly from larger watercourses, as turbidity and siltation have increased (Trautman 1981).

Northern Sunfish is diurnal; it occupies clear waters and likely has good vision. The brilliant colouration in males indicates that visual communication is important during courtship. Similarly, visual displays are used to signal aggression. Production of sound during courtship and mating also suggests that Northern Sunfish, like many fishes, has auditory perception.

Dispersal and Migration

Movement appears to be limited. Spawning sites are thought to be in close proximity to habitat used at other times of year (Carlander 1977; Keenleyside 1978). Berra and Gunning (1972) suggested that the closely related Central Longear Sunfish (L. m. megalotis) in three Louisiana streams occupy small home ranges (average length of 42 m) during the warm months but that many individuals abandon these areas during the cold months. Patterns of seasonal dispersal of Northern Sunfish in Canada are not known.

Interspecific Interactions

Northern Sunfish hybridizes with Green Sunfish (L. cyanellus), Orangespotted Sunfish (L. humilis) (Trautman 1981), Bluegill (L. macrochirus) (Scott and Crossman 1973), and Pumpkinseed (Keenleyside 1978; Bolnick 2009). Keenleyside (1978) found evidence that Pumpkinseed and Northern Sunfish partition nesting habitat in the Thames River; Pumpkinseed nests were situated in backwater areas with silty substrate while most Northern Sunfish nests were located at sites with some flow and gravel substrate. Northern Sunfish is found in warmwater stream and lake habitats and is associated with somewhat different species assemblages in each situation. Common species in lake habitats include Bluegill, Pumpkinseed, and Yellow Perch (Perca flavescens) (Jennings 2013). Stream habitats containing Northern Sunfish frequently support diverse fish communities (Lyons 1984; Jennings 2013).

Northern Sunfish is an opportunistic feeder but is primarily an insectivore (Scott and Crossman 1973; Jennings 2013). It feeds on a variety of mature and immature insects captured throughout the water column as well as small fishes and fish eggs.

Numerous species include Northern Sunfish in their diets including wading birds and predatory fishes, especially basses (Micropterus spp.) (Goddard and Mathis 1997b; Bromilow 2014).

Population Sizes and Trends

Sampling and Abundance

Northern Sunfish has been recorded in Ontario in every decade since the 1920s with increasing frequency in recent decades due to more thorough sampling. In Québec, only 29 records exist; the first observations were in 1941. Most records date from the 1960s and 1970s and few observations exist since 1983 (Appendix 1). Although there is a long time series of Canadian records, the sampling employed does not support estimation of abundance.

Fluctuations and Trends

In the relatively remote areas of northwestern Ontario, the species appears to be widespread, although sampling has not been exhaustive. Populations in this DU are subject to less pressure from agricultural and other forms of development than populations in the Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU. Furthermore, some of the range in this area lies within Quetico Provincial Park where the species is largely protected from these influences. Populations of this DU are probably stable, although the spread of invasive species may be having negative impact on Northern Sunfish (see Invasive Species in Threats section).

Population trends for the Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU are unclear. Trends in water quality are variable, even within watersheds. Water quality has been stable in recent years in many subwatersheds such as the Lower North Sydenham and Bear Creek Headwaters (SCRCA 2013). Other subwatersheds (e.g. Middle East Sydenham and Bannockburn) have experienced improved water quality in recent years (SCRCA 2013; Brock and Veliz 2013 respectively), while others (e.g. Brown Creek) have experienced deteriorating water quality (SCRCA 2013). Unfortunately, the sampling data are not informative regarding population trends through time.

Populations in Québec appear to be at greatest risk. Habitat degradation is severe in the Châteauguay and Yamaska rivers due to siltation and contaminant inputs (Simoneau 2007; Berryman 2008) and the species is considered to be rare (Jean-Franҫois Desroches, pers.comm.; Louis Bernatchez, pers. comm.). Unfortunately, the data available are not sufficient to infer quantitative population trends. For example, more than 50 percent (20 of 39) of Northern Sunfish records from Québec are from the Châteauguay watershed (Appendix 1). Electrofishing surveys conducted in that watershed in 1993 to measure fish diversity produced two Northern Sunfish at a single station. In 2006, additional electrofishing was conducted in the Châteauguay targeting Channel Darter (Percina copelandi). Although many stations were sampled, Northern Sunfish was not found (Marc-Antoine Couillard, pers. comm.). The small number of Northern Sunfish collected in recent years suggests a decline in IAO and EOO. The RSI network collected no Northern Sunfish despite sampling extensively over multiple years at locations that yielded Northern Sunfish historically (e.g. Lac St-Pierre, Lac, St-Louis, Lac St-François). Similarly, extensive sampling in the Yamaska River between 1987 and 1997 failed to find Northern Sunfish (Holm et al. 2001; COSEWIC 2013b). Even in the Châteauguay River, the watershed that has yielded the largest proportion of Québec records, the number of fish reported is small considering the magnitude of sampling that has been done. The weight of evidence suggests the species is declining in Québec. This is consistent with results from the threats calculator (Appendix 3), which indicates ongoing declines driven mainly by agricultural pollution.

Rescue Effect

Northern Sunfish is present in states bordering Canadian populations including Minnesota, Michigan (lower peninsula), Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York. The species has declined across much of Ohio (Trautman 1981), Michigan (Hubbs et al. 2004), and Illinois (Smith 1979). There is a gap separating populations in Minnesota from those in northwestern Ontario. Considering the low dispersal propensity of the species (Carlander 1977; Keenleyside 1978), there is little opportunity for rescue from the U.S. or between Canadian subpopulations in western Ontario and southern Ontario/Québec.

Threats and Limiting Factors

Overall threats impacts were assessed as low in DU1 and high-medium in DU2. Discussion of specific threats follow.

Turbidity and Sediment Loading

The most important threat to Northern Sunfish, particularly in the Great Lakes – Upper St, Lawrence DU, is habitat degradation caused by siltation and contaminants such as chloride (Appendix 2; Appendix 3). The species is sensitive to these stressors (Scott and Crossman 1973; Carlander 1977) and Trautman (1981) has described its widespread decline and replacement by Green Sunfish in Ohio as a result of these factors. In Canada, this threat is most acute in watercourses in southern Ontario and southern Québec, where the intensity of agriculture and other forms of development such as urbanization is high. These problems are well documented in the Sydenham River where most forest cover has been removed and approximately 85% of the watershed has been converted to agricultural use including widespread use of tile drainage (Staton et al. 2003). Turbidity was monitored by the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy over a 30-year period (1967-1996) and was found to be high, particularly in the north branch. In addition, high levels of suspended solids were accompanied by nutrient loading, particularly phosphate and nitrogen (Staton et al. 2003). Success of recent efforts to mitigate silt loading in the Sydenham River and other watersheds remains to be determined (Erin Carroll, pers. comm.).

Rivers in southern Québec are also affected by intensive agricultural development and urbanization. Land use in the Châteauguay watershed is dominated by increasingly intensive agriculture (72% of the surface area; Simoneau 2007). Similarly, approximately 47% of the Yamaska River watershed is devoted to intensive agriculture (Berryman 2008) and contains significant urban areas. Consequently, water quality in much of both systems is poor with high levels of turbidity and contaminants.

Invasive Species

The most likely invasive species to threaten Northern Sunfish in the Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU is Round Goby (Neogobius melanostomus), which was first reported in Lake St. Clair in 1990. The species has spread throughout the Great Lakes (Kornis et al. 2012) and the St. Lawrence, and has invaded watersheds occupied by Northern Sunfish including the Trent, Moira (Scott Reid, pers. comm.), Sydenham, Ausable, Thames, and Grand rivers (Poos et al. 2010). Although Round Goby has had negative impact on benthic species (e.g. nest predation), its impact on Northern Sunfish remains to be determined.

Expansion of the ranges of predatory Largemouth Bass (Micropterus salmoides), and Smallmouth Bass (M. dolomieu) may threaten Northern Sunfish in the Saskatchewan-Nelson DU (Crossman and Buerschaper 1976; Brown et al. 2009a, b). Green Sunfish is also experiencing range expansion in northwestern Ontario. This species is more tolerant of elevated turbidity than Northern Sunfish and has replaced the latter in some Ohio watercourses where turbidity has increased (Trautman 1981). Green Sunfish is an aggressive competitor, and when introduced elsewhere, has frequently been implicated in significant disruption of native fish communities (e.g. Lemly 1985; Olden and Poff 2005). The ultimate impact of these range extensions is not known. Another invasive species that may negatively affect Northern Sunfish in northwest Ontario is Rusty Crayfish (Orconectes rusticus). This large, aggressive species originates from the Ohio Valley and may degrade habitat used by Northern Sunfish by consuming large amounts of aquatic vegetation (Brian Jackson, pers. comm.).

Angling and Bait Fishery

Angling for Northern Sunfish is not prohibited in Ontario. Although the species is small, and therefore not generally targeted by anglers, it is sometimes caught incidentally by anglers fishing for basses or larger sunfishes. It is easily captured and is potentially harmed or killed in the process. Overall, the impact of angling in not known.

Annual sales of baitfishes in Ontario of approximately $14 million reflect the large-scale use of live bait by anglers (some 100 million fishes harvested; OMNR and BAO 2006). In addition to commercial sales, many anglers catch their own baitfishes (Drake and Mandrak 2014). Although regulations prohibit collection of species at risk for the bait industry, a certain level of bycatch of non-target species occurs. In a survey of retail bait outlets, Drake and Mandrak (2014) did not record Northern Sunfish among non-target species caught as bycatch, although three centrarchid species were noted. Furthermore, Northern Sunfish frequently co-occurs with Redfin Shiner (Lythrurus umbratilis), a legal baitfish species, suggesting the potential for bycatch. However, since the latter is seldom targeted by baitfishers, the risk of capturing Northern Sunfish as bycatch is probably low, but not zero (Andrew Drake, pers. comm. 2015). Use of live bait poses the additional threat of potential for introduction of invasive non-native species including pathogens.

Ornamental Fish Trade

A potential threat to Northern Sunfish is the ornamental fish trade (Meredith and Houston 1987). Breeding males are brilliantly pigmented and, therefore, desirable aquarium fish for some hobbyists. The species’ small size and interesting behaviour add to its attraction. Longear Sunfish is offered for sale by at least one supplier of aquarium fishes in Taiwan. Although the origin of the stock is unknown, it could actually be Northern Sunfish. The scope and severity of this threat are unknown, but probably very low.

Limiting Factors

Perhaps the most important limiting factor for Northern Sunfish is its restricted movement within, and presumably, among watersheds. The species is considered to be a poor colonizer and is slow to repopulate habitat following its removal (Carlander 1977). Its low tolerance of poor water quality can also be considered a limiting factor.

Number of Locations

Siltation and pollution, the most important threats, emanate from numerous point and non-point sources. The number of locations can therefore be considered to be the number of watersheds occupied. This number is uncertain; however, there are clearly many more than ten (threshold for quantitative criteria).

Protection, Status and Ranks

Legal Protection and Status

Northern Sunfish was previously assessed by COSEWIC as Not at Risk (Meredith and Houston 1987). It is, therefore, not currently listed under the Canadian Species at Risk Act. Northern Sunfish can be legally taken as a sport fish and is subject to catch and possession limits. It is therefore protected under the federal Fisheries Act, particularly in waters supporting other game and/or commercial species.

In Ontario, Northern Sunfish is considered a “Sunfish” under provincial fishing regulations, so catch limits apply. Destruction or alteration of riparian areas and wetlands are regulated and protected under the following: Conservation Authorities Act, Provincial Planning Act, Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, and Water Resources Act. The Ontario Conservation Authorities Act is intended to protect aquatic habitat through the creation of conservation authorities, which promote integrated watershed management and conservation through projects such as tree planting, wetland creation, and erosion control (see Habitat Trends).

In Québec, it is included (as L. megalotis) on the Liste des espèces susceptibles d’être désignées menacées ou vulnérables (list of wildlife species likely to be designated threatened or vulnerable) in accordance with the Loi sur les espèces menacées ou vulnérables (RLRQ, c E-12.01) (LEMV) (Act respecting threatened or vulnerable species) (CQLR, c E-12.01).

In the United States, it is not on the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants.

Non-Legal Status and Ranks

Northern Sunfish is not listed on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and has no American Fisheries Society status. NatureServe (NatureServe 2014) rankings of Northern Sunfish in various jurisdictions are shown below.

Global
G5 (Secure
Canada
N3 (Vulnerable)
Ontario
S3 (vulnerable)
Québec
S2 (imperilled)
U.S. - N5
Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania - SNR (Not Ranked)

Michigan ranks L. megalotis as S5 (widespread and common) while Wisconsin ranks the species as S2. These ranks presumably refer to L. peltastes as L. megalotis does not occur in either state.

Habitat Protection and Ownership

Recent changes to the federal Fisheries Act relating to habitat raise uncertainty about future protection of this species. Most of the land base in watersheds supporting Northern Sunfish in southern Ontario and Québec is privately owned, although some is publicly owned (e.g. Pinery Provincial Park, Point Pelee National Park). Much of northwestern Ontario is crown land, notably Quetico Provincial Park.

Acknowledgements and Authorities Contacted

Information provided by the following authorities/agencies is acknowledged: Fisheries and Oceans Canada (Burlington, Winnipeg, Sault Ste. Marie), Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs du Québec, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Royal Ontario Museum, Canadian Museum of Nature, Parks Canada, Upper Thames Conservation Authority, St. Clair Region Conservation Authority, Ausable Bayfield Conservation Authority, Quinte Conservation Authority, and Quetico Provincial Park. Brian Jackson provided unpublished length/age data from Quetico Provincial Park. Dr. John Lyons (Wisconsin DNR) is acknowledged for permission to use the global distribution map (Figure 2). Several individuals provided thorough reviews of an earlier version of the report, including Nick Mandrak, James Grant, Mark Ridgway, and personnel from DFO, MFFP, and MNRF. Jenny Wu and Alain Filion prepared the maps and calculated EOO and IAO.

Authorities Contacted

Muriel Andraea, St. Clair Region Conservation Authority

Louis Bernatchez, Université Laval

Lynn Bouvier, Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Erin Carroll, St. Clair Region Conservation Authority

Brian Code, Canadian Museum of Nature

Marc Antoine Couillard, Ministère des Forêts de la Faune et des Parcs du Québec

Jean-Franҫois Desroches, CEGEP Sherbrooke

Andrew Drake, University of Toronto

Margaret Docker, University of Manitoba

Isabelle Gauthier, Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs du Québec

James Grant, Concordia University

Erling Holm, Royal Ontario Museum

John Jimmo, St. Clair Region Conservation Authority

Nick Mandrak, University of Toronto

Brad McNevin, Quinte Conservation Authority

Patrick Nantel, Parks Canada

Tom Pratt, Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Scott Reid, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry

John Schwindt, Upper Thames River Conservation Authority

Doug Watkinson, Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Information Sources

Bailey, R.M., W.C. Latta, and G.R. Smith. 2004. An Atlas of Michigan Fishes with Keys and Illustrations for their Identification. Miscellaneous Publications of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan 192:1-215.

BAPE (Bureau d’audiences publique sur l’environnement). 2003. Rapport 179. Consultation publique sur le développement durable de la production porcine au Québec, Rapport principal. L’inscription de l’industrie porcine dans le développement durable. Québec: BAPE.

Bernatchez, L., pers. comm. 2014. Email communication. December 2014. Laval University, Québec.

Berra, T.M., and G.E. Gunning. 1972. Seasonal movement and home range of longear sunfish, Lepomis megalotis (Rafinesque) in Louisiana. American Midland Naturalist 88:368-375.

Berryman, D. 2008. État de l’écosystème aquatique du basin versant de la rivière Yamaska: faits saillant 2004-2006, Québec, ministère du Développement durable, de l’Environnement et des Parcs, Direction du suivi de l’état de l’environnement, ISBN 978-2-550-53592-8 (PDF), 22 pp.

Bolnick, D.I. 2009. Hybridization and speciation in centrarchids in Centrarchid Fishes: Diversity, Biology, and Conservation. S.J. Cooke and D.P. Philipp eds. Wiley-Blackwell & Sons, Chichester, U.K. xvii + 539 pp.

Brock, H. and M. Veliz. 2013. Ausable Bayfield Conservation Authority Watershed Report Card 2013. Ausable Bayfield Conservation Authority. Exeter, Ontario. 102 pp.

Bromilow, M. 2014. (On-Line), Animal Diversity Web. Accessed January 06, 2015.

Brown, T.G., B. Runciman, S. Pollard, A.D.A. Grant, and M.J. Bradford. 2009a. Biological synopsis of smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu). Can. Manuscr. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2887: v + 50 pp.

Brown, T.G., B. Runciman, S. Pollard, and A.D.A. Grant. 2009b. Biological synopsis of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides). Can. Manuscr. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2884: v + 27 pp.

Carlander, K.D. 1977. Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology, Volume 2. Iowa State University Press. Ames, Iowa.

Carroll, E. pers. comm. 2015. Telephone and email communication. January 2015. St. Clair Region Conservation Authority, Strathroy, Ontario.

COSEWIC. 2013a. COSEWIC Status Report on Pugnose Shiner Notropis anogenus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada.

COSEWIC. 2013b. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Bridle Shiner Notropis bifrenatusin Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. xi + 30 pp.

COSEWIC. 2014. COSEWIC Status Report on Channel Darter Percina copelandi in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. x + 55 pp.

Couillard, M.-A. pers. comm. 2015. Email communication. June 2015. Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs du Québec, Québec (Qc).

Crossman, E.J. and P. Buerschaper. 1976. Quetico Fishes. Royal Ontario Museum Publiations in Life Science. 86 pp.

Desroches, F., pers. comm. 2014. Email communication. December 2014. CEGEP, Sherbrooke, Québec.

Drake, D.A.R., pers. comm. 2015. Email communication. January 2015. University of Toronto, Scarborough.

Drake, D.A.R. and N.E. Mandrak. 2014. Ecological risk of live bait fisheries: a new angle on selective fishing. Fisheries 39:201-211.

Elliot, K.A. 1998. The forests of southern Ontario. The Forestry Chronicle 74:850-854.

Gerald, J.W. 1971. Sound production during courtship in six species of sunfish (Centrarchidae). Evolution 25:75-87.

Goddard, K., and A. Mathis. 1997a. Do opercular flaps of male longear sunfish Lepomis megalotisserve as sexual ornaments during female mate choice? Ethology, Ecology and Evolution 9:223-231.

Goddard, K. and A. Mathis. 1997b. Microhabitat preferences of longear sunfish: low light versus submerged cover. Environmental Biology of Fishes 49:495-499.

Grand River Watershed Water Management Plan. 2014 (PDF: 10 Mb). Prepared by the Project Team, Water Management Plan. Grand River Conservation Authority, Canbridge, ON. 137 pp + appendices.

Gruchy, C.G. and W.B. Scott. 1966. Lepomic megalotis, the Longear Sunfish, in Western Ontario. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 23:1457-1459.

Hall-Armstrong, J., A.G. Harris, and R.F. Foster. 1996. Fish Use of Wetlands in Northwestern Ontario: A Literature Review and Bibliography. Northwest Sci. & Technol., Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Thunder Bay, Ontario. TR-90 54 pp + Appendices.

Holm, E., P. Dumont, J. Leclerc, G. Roy, and E.J. Crossman. 2001. COSEWIC status report on the bridle shiner Notropis bifrenatus in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 19 pp.

Holm, E., N. Mandrak and M. Burridge. 2010. The ROM Field Guide to the Freshwater Fishes of Ontario. Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ontario. 464 pp.

Hubbs, C.L. and G.P. Cooper. 1935. Age and growth of the long-eared and green sunfishes in Michigan. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 20:669-696.

Hubbs, C.L., K.F. Lagler, and G.R. Smith. 2004. Fishes of the Great Lakes Region. University of Michigan Press. Ann Arbor. 276 pp.

Jackson, B. Personal communication. January 2016. Biologist, Quetico Provincial Park, Ontario.

Jennings, M.J. 2013. Longear Sunfish, Lepomis megalotis. Online account in: J. Lyons, editor. Fishes of Wisconsin E-Book. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, and U.S. Geological Survey, Middleton, WI. accessed on 1 January 2015.

Jennings, M.J. and D.P. Philipp. 1992a. Genetic variation in the longear sunfish (Lepomis megalotis). Canadian Journal of Zoology 70:1673-1680.

Jennings, M.J. and D.P. Philipp. 1992b. Female choice and male competition in longear sunfish Lepomis megalotis. Behavioral Ecology 3:84-94.

Jennings, M.J. and D.P. Philipp. 1994. Biotic and abiotic factors affecting early life history intervals of stream-dwelling sunfish. Environmental Biology of Fishes 39-153-159.

Keenleyside, M.H.A. 1972. Intraspecific intrusions into nests of spawning longear sunfish (Pisces: Centrarchidae). Copeia 1972:272-278.

Keenleyside, M.H.A. 1978. Reproductive isolation between Pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus) and Longear Sunfish (L. megalotis)(Centrarchidae) in the Thames River, southwestern Ontario. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 35:131-135.

Kornis, M.S., N. Mercado-Silva, and M.J. Vander Zanden. 2012. Twenty years of invasion: a review of round goby Neogobius melanostomus biology, spread and ecological implications. Journal of Fish Biology 80:235-285.

Lemly, A.D. 1985. Suppression of native fish populations by green sunfish in first-order streams of Piedmont North California. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 114:705-712.

Lyons, J. 1984. Fishes of the upper Trout River, Vilas County, Wisconsin. Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters. 72:201-211.

Mandrak, N.E. and E.J. Crossman. 1992. Postglacial dispersal of freshwater fishes into Ontario. Canadian Journal of Zoology 70:2247-2259.

Meredith, G.N. and J.J. Houston. 1987. COSEWIC status report on the Northern Sunfish Lepomis peltastes in Canada in Status Report on the Longear Sunfish Lepomis megalotis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 17 pp.

NatureServe. 2014. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. (Accessed January 6, 2015).

Olden, J.D. and N.L. Poff. 2005. Long-term trends of native and non-native fish faunas in the American Southwest. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 28:75-89.

OMNR (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources) and BAO (Bait Association of Ontario) 2006. The commercial bait industry in Ontario: statistical report, 2005. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada.

Page, L.M., H. Espinosa-Pérez, L.T. Findley, C.R. Gilbert, R.N Lea, N.E. Mandrak, R.L. Mayden, and J.S. Nelson. 2013. Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. 7th Edition, American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 34.

Page, L.M. and B.M Burr. 2011. Peterson Field Guide to Freshwater Fishes of North America North of Mexico. 2nd Edition, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston, New York. 663 pp.

Poos, M., A.J. Dextrase, A.N. Schwalb, and J.D. Ackerman. 2010. Secondary invasion of the round goby into high diversity Great Lakes tributaries and species at risk hotspots: potential new concerns for endangered freshwater species. Biological Invasions 12:1269-1284.

Reid, S. 2015. Email communication. January 2015. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources & Forestry, Peterborough, Ontario.

Scott, W.B. and E.J Crossman. 1973. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Bulletin 181.

Simoneau, M. 2007. État de l’écosystème aquatique du basin versant de la rivière Châteauguay: faits saillant 2001-2004, Québec, ministère du Développement durable, de l’Environment et des Parcs, Direction du suivi de l’état de l’environment, ISBN 978-2-550-50193-0 (PDF), 16 pp.

Smith, P.W. 1979. The Fishes of Illinois. University of Illinois Press, Champaign.

SCRCA. 2013. St. Clair Region Conservation Authority Watershed Report card 2013. Available at http://www.scrca.on.ca/about-us/2013-watershed-report-cards/.

Staton, S.K., A. Dextrase, J.L. Metcalf-Smith, J. DiMaio, M. Nelson, J. Parish, B. Kilgour, and E. Holm. 2003. Status and trends of Ontario’s Sydenham River ecosystem in relation to aquatic species at risk. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 88:283-310.

Trautman, M.B. 1981. The Fishes of Ohio. Ohio State University Press. Columbus. 966 pp.

UTRCA. 2012. Upper Thames River Conservation Watershed Report Cards.

Biographical Summary of Report Writers

Tim Birt is a Research Associate and Adjunct Assistant Professor at Queen’s University. His research activities are currently focused on population genetics and evolution of seabirds. He has also worked with fishes, especially Atlantic Salmon. Tim has authored or co-authored three COSEWIC status reports.

Collections Examined

None.

Appendix 1: Northern Sunfish records from Ontario and Québec.

Many entries represent more than one individual captured. Sources include: Canadian Museum of Nature (CMN), Royal Ontario Museum (ROM), Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), Ministère des Forêts, de la Faune et des Parcs du Québec (MFFP), and St. Clair Region Conservation Authority (SCRCA).

DU1 - Saskatchewan-Nelson
Date Specimen ID Watercourse Source
08-Jul-60 CMNFI 1965-0030.2 Burditt Lake CMN
17-Jun-70 CMNFI 1970-0141.3 Rainy River District CMN
08-Jul-60 21643 Burditt Lake ROM
09-Jun-69 26748 Cirrus Lake ROM
26-Jun-67 26835 Darky Lake ROM
Aug-67 26923 Lake of The Woods ROM
22-Aug-69 26951 Caviar Lake ROM
08-Sep-70 27354 Bart Lake ROM
06-Jun-71 27776 Quetico Lake ROM
18-Jul-71 27855 Melin Lake ROM
23-Jul-71 27857 Mahon Lake ROM
23-Jul-71 27858 Mahon Lake ROM
25-Jun-75 28659 Little Roland Lake ROM
15-Jul-73 30216 Lake No 190 ROM
08-Jun-74 30542 Kakagi Lake ROM
03-Jun-76 32231 Corn Lake ROM
31-Jul-70 33067 Weld Lake ROM
02-Aug-70 33068 Ryckman Lake ROM
05-Jul-78 35953 Deacon Lake ROM
19-Jul-79 36408 Unnamed Lake ROM
20-Aug-79 38015 Shoal Lake ROM
29-Jul-80 41604 Redhorse Lake ROM
17-Jul-83 52259 Birch Lake ROM
17-Jul-83 52262 Birch Lake ROM
03-Aug-83 52263 Tourist Lake (Nl) ROM
03-Aug-83 52264 Tourist Lake (Nl) ROM
27-Aug-85 57621 Wawapus Lake ROM
27-Aug-85 57623 Wawapus Lake ROM
06-Jun-87 89429 Shingwak ROM
07-Aug-80 - Darby Creek ROM
20-Jul-88 - Osipasinni Lake ROM
19-Jul-88 - Osipasinni Lake ROM
19-Jul-88 - Osipasinni Lake ROM
15-Jul-85 - Kramer Lake ROM
19-Jul-88 - Osipasinni Lake (Nl) ROM
20-Jul-88 - Osipasinni Lake (Nl) ROM
20-Jul-88 - Osipasinni Lake (Nl) ROM
06-Aug-87 - (NL) Lake VF 55-08 ROM
28-Jul-86 - Noonan Lake ROM
27-Aug-85 - Wawapus Lake ROM
18-Jul-88 - Osipasinni Lake (Nl) ROM
06-Aug-87 - (NL) Lake VF 55-08 ROM
05-Jul-84 - Lowry Lake ROM
02-Jul-88 - Hectorine Lake ROM
02-Aug-83 - Sandhill Lake ROM
09-Jul-87 - Forrest Lake ROM
20-Jun-83 - Newman Lake ROM
11-Jun-83 - Backlawrence Lake (Nl) ROM
09-Jun-83 - Little Moose Lake (Nl) ROM
05-Jul-84 - Lowry Lake ROM
16-Jul-85 - Kramer Lake ROM
30-Jun-87 - Beggs ROM
08-Jul-87 - Forrest Lake ROM
07-Jul-87 - Forrest Lake ROM
01-Jul-87 - Beggs ROM
19-Aug-87 - Moosehorn ROM
10-Jul-86 - Manitumeig Lake ROM
19-May-85 - Loonhaunt Lake ROM
21-May-85 - Loonhaunt Lake ROM
2008-2014 15-4430-54221 Burditt Lake MNRF
2008-2014 15-4632-54287 Loonhaunt Lake >MNRF
2008-2014 15-6052-53411 Sarah Lake MNRF
DU2 - Great Lakes - Upper St. Lawrence
Date Specimen ID Watercourse Source
26-Jul-12 2012-CH-ESD-SYD260712-005A Sydenham River DFO
21-Aug-12 2012-FMOS-SR210812-011A Sydenham River DFO
01-Aug-12 2012-GPND010812-001A Beaver Creek DFO
01-Aug-12 2012-GPND010812-002A Beaver Creek DFO
02-Aug-12 2012-GPND020812-001A Beaver Creek DFO
02-Aug-12 2012-GPND020812-002A Beaver Creek DFO
03-Jul-12 2012-GPND030712-001A Beaver Creek DFO
03-Aug-12 2012-GPND030812-001A Beaver Creek DFO
03-Aug-12 2012-GPND030812-002A Beaver Creek DFO
04-Jul-12 2012-GPND040712-001A Beaver Creek DFO
05-Jul-12 2012-GPND050712-001A Beaver Creek DFO
11-Jul-12 2012-GPND110712-002A Beaver Creek DFO
13-Jun-12 2012-GPND130612-001A Beaver Creek DFO
13-Jul-12 2012-GPND130712-001A Beaver Creek DFO
13-Jul-12 2012-GPND130712-002A Beaver Creek DFO
15-Jun-12 2012-GPND150612-002A Beaver Creek DFO
18-Jun-12 2012-GPND180612-001A Beaver Creek DFO
18-Jun-12 2012-GPND180612-002A Beaver Creek DFO
18-Jul-12 2012-GPND180712-001A Beaver Creek DFO
19-Jul-12 2012-GPND190712-001A Beaver Creek DFO
19-Jul-12 2012-GPND190712-003A Beaver Creek DFO
20-Jun-12 2012-GPND200612-001A Beaver Creek DFO
23-Jul-12 2012-GPND230712-001A Beaver Creek DFO
24-Jul-12 2012-GPND240712-001A Beaver Creek DFO
25-Jun-12 2012-GPND250612-001A Beaver Creek DFO
30-Jul-12 2012-GPND300712-001A Beaver Creek DFO
31-Jul-12 2012-GPND310712-002A Beaver Creek DFO
23-Jul-12 2012-LCS-HURON230712-001A Old Ausable Channel DFO
24-Jul-12 2012-LCS-HURON240712-002A Old Ausable Channel DFO
24-Jul-12 2012-LCS-HURON240712-004A Old Ausable Channel DFO
19-Sep-12 2012-SLCC190912-112A East Sydenham River DFO
25-Jun-13 2013-AC-MON-CEDAR250613-001B Cedar Creek DFO
07-Aug-13 2013-PNM-LSCD070813-006A East Otter Creek DFO
09-Jul-13 2013-PNM-LSCD090713-001C West Otter Creek DFO
09-Jul-13 2013-PNM-LSCD090713-002C West Otter Creek DFO
19-Jun-13 2013-SLCC-DTR190613-121A Detroit River DFO
19-Jun-13 2013-SLCC-DTR190613-122A Detroit River DFO
23-Sep-02 AUCR02-01-01-BS Ausable Channel DFO
23-Sep-02 AUCR02-01-01-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-01-02-BEF Ausable Channel DFO
23-Sep-02 AUCR02-01-02-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-01-03-BEF Ausable Channel DFO
23-Sep-02 AUCR02-01-03-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-01-04-BEF Ausable Channel DFO
23-Sep-02 AUCR02-01-04-HN Ausable Channel DFO
23-Sep-02 AUCR02-01-04-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-02-01-BS Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-02-01-HN Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-02-01-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-02-02-BEF Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-02-02-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-02-03-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-02-04-HN Ausable Channel DFO
24-Sep-02 AUCR02-02-04-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
25-Sep-02 AUCR02-03-01-BS Ausable Channel DFO
25-Sep-02 AUCR02-03-01-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
25-Sep-02 AUCR02-03-02-BS Ausable Channel DFO
25-Sep-02 AUCR02-03-02-HN Ausable Channel DFO
25-Sep-02 AUCR02-03-02-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
25-Sep-02 AUCR02-03-03-BEF Ausable Channel DFO
25-Sep-02 AUCR02-03-03-HN Ausable Channel DFO
25-Sep-02 AUCR02-03-03-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
25-Sep-02 AUCR02-03-04-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
26-Sep-02 AUCR02-04-01-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
26-Sep-02 AUCR02-04-02-BEF Ausable Channel DFO
26-Sep-02 AUCR02-04-02-BS Ausable Channel DFO
26-Sep-02 AUCR02-04-02-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
26-Sep-02 AUCR02-04-03-BEF Ausable Channel DFO
26-Sep-02 AUCR02-04-03-HN Ausable Channel DFO
26-Sep-02 AUCR02-04-03-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
26-Sep-02 AUCR02-04-04-HN Ausable Channel DFO
26-Sep-02 AUCR02-04-04-WT/MT Ausable Channel DFO
07-Jul-04 AUCR04BP070704005 Old Ausable Channel DFO
14-Jul-04 AUCR04BP140704009 Little Ausable River DFO
21-Jul-04 AUCR04BP210704016 Ausable River DFO
23-Jul-04 AUCR04BP230704019 Ausable River DFO
12-Jul-04 AUCR04BS120704006 Ausable River DFO
15-Jul-04 AUCR04BS150704011 Ausable River DFO
15-Jul-04 AUCR04BS150704012 Ausable River DFO
09-Jul-04 AUCR04SN090704017 Old Ausable Channel DFO
09-Jul-04 AUCR04SN090704018 Old Ausable Channel DFO
12-Aug-04 AUCR04SN120804001 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804001 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804002 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804003 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804004 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804005 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804006 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804007 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804008 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804009 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804010 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804011 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804012 Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Aug-04 AUCR04SN180804013 Old Ausable Channel DFO
19-Oct-04 AUCR04SN191004002 Old Ausable Channel DFO
20-Oct-04 AUCR04SN201004001 Old Ausable Channel DFO
09-Aug-07 AUS07-090807-001 Ausable River DFO
09-Aug-07 AUS07-090807-003 Ausable River DFO
14-Aug-07 AUS07-140807-002 Ausable River DFO
23-Jul-07 AUS07-230707-001 Ausable River DFO
25-Jul-07 AUS07-250707-001 Ausable River DFO
26-Jul-07 AUS07-260707-003 Ausable River DFO
29-Aug-07 AUS07-290807-004 Old Ausable Channel DFO
28-Aug-02 AUSR02-001 Ausable River DFO
29-Aug-02 AUSR02-002 Ausable River DFO
29-Aug-02 AUSR02-004 Ausable River DFO
28-Aug-02 AUSR02-005 Ausable River DFO
28-Aug-02 AUSR02-007 Ausable River DFO
29-Aug-02 AUSR02-008 Ausable River DFO
29-Aug-02 AUSR02-016 Ausable River DFO
28-Aug-02 AUSR02-018 Ausable River DFO
28-Aug-02 AUSR02-022 Ausable River DFO
13-Sep-02 BEF02-MCK-001 Muddy Creek DFO
18-Jul-02 BEF02-SYD-004 Sydenham River DFO
20-Aug-02 BEF02-SYD-005 Sydenham River DFO
08-Aug-02 BEF02-SYD-006 Sydenham River DFO
21-Aug-02 BEF02-SYD-007 Sydenham River DFO
20-Aug-03 DTR03038C Detroit River DFO
23-Aug-03 DTR03039 Detroit River DFO
25-Aug-03 DTR03TC003 Turkey Creek DFO
25-Aug-03 DTR03TC004 Turkey Creek DFO
23-Jun-09 ESDPG-SYD09-230609-001 Sydenham River DFO
23-Jun-09 ESDPG-SYD09-230609-002 Sydenham River DFO
23-Jun-09 ESDPG-SYD09-230609-005 Sydenham River DFO
24-Jun-09 ESDPG-SYD09-240609-004 Fansher Creek DFO
25-Jun-09 ESDPG-SYD09-250609-006 Sydenham River DFO
08-Jul-09 GPND09-080709-001 Beaver Creek DFO
09-Jul-08 GRRGP08-090708-005B Grand River DFO
09-Jul-08 GRRGP08-090708-006B Grand River DFO
20-Oct-04 GSD04BP201004004 Sydenham River DFO
22-Aug-02 HMM02-001 Hillman Marsh DFO
06-Aug-02 MOXD02-MTR-001 Belgrave Creek DFO
07-Aug-02 MOXD02-MTR-002 Maitland River DFO
29-Jul-02 MOXD02-THR-002 Fish Creek DFO
30-Jul-02 MOXD02-THR-003 Medway Creek DFO
30-Jul-02 MOXD02-THR-004 Fish Creek DFO
31-May-05 OAC05-053105-001 Old Ausable Channel DFO
31-May-05 OAC05-053105-003 Old Ausable Channel DFO
28-Jun-05 OAC05-062805-001 Old Ausable Channel DFO
28-Jun-05 OAC05-062805-002 Old Ausable Channel DFO
28-Jun-05 OAC05-062805-003 Old Ausable Channel DFO
02-Aug-05 OAC05-080205-001 Old Ausable Channel DFO
03-Aug-05 OAC05-080305-001 Old Ausable Channel DFO
03-Aug-05 OAC05-080305-002 Old Ausable Channel DFO
03-Aug-05 OAC05-080305-004 Old Ausable Channel DFO
04-Aug-05 OAC05-080405-001 Old Ausable Channel DFO
27-Jul-10 PDAH-PNM-2010-270710-004B Sydenham River DFO
27-Jul-10 PDAH-PNM-2010-270710-005B Sydenham River DFO
29-Jul-10 PDAH-PNM-2010-290710-001A Otter Creek DFO
01-Jun-10 PDAH-PNS-2010-010610-001A Old Ausable Channel DFO
18-Jul-05 PFBK05-071805-002 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
20-Jul-05 PFBK05-072005-006 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
11-Oct-05 PFBK05-101105-001 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
11-Oct-05 PFBK05-101105-007 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
12-Oct-05 PFBK05-101205-001 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
12-Oct-05 PFBK05-101205-002 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
12-Oct-05 PFBK05-101205-004 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
12-Oct-05 PFBK05-101205-005 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
13-Oct-05 PFBK05-101305-003 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
13-Oct-05 PFBK05-101305-006 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
15-Nov-05 PFBK05-111505-001 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
15-Nov-05 PFBK05-111505-002 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
15-Nov-05 PFBK05-111505-003 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
15-Nov-05 PFBK05-111505-006 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
15-Nov-05 PFBK05-111505-007 Pefferlaw Brook DFO
20-Jul-05 PFBK05-200705-005b Pefferlaw Brook DFO
16-Aug-10 PG10-160810-001A Sydenham River DFO
16-Aug-10 PG10-160810-001B Sydenham River DFO
17-Aug-10 PG10-170810-001A Sydenham River DFO
17-Aug-10 PG10-170810-001B Sydenham River DFO
18-Aug-10 PG10-180810-001A Sydenham River DFO
20-Aug-10 PG10-200810-001A East Sydenham River DFO
27-Aug-10 PG10-270810-001A East Sydenham River DFO
11-Jul-07 RCR07-071107-002c Sydenham River trib. DFO
14-Jul-07 RCR07-071407-0a1c Grand River DFO
07-Aug-07 RCR07-080707-003a Maitland River DFO
07-Aug-07 RCR07-080707-003d Maitland River DFO
07-Aug-07 RCR07-080707-003e Maitland River DFO
16-Sep-03 SYD091603-1BPEF East Sydenham River DFO
16-Sep-03 SYD091603-1SN East Sydenham River DFO
16-Sep-03 SYD091603-2SN East Sydenham River DFO
23-Sep-10 SYDTR10-230910-002A Sydenham River DFO
04-Jul-05 TWR05-070405-002 Teeswater River DFO
04-Jul-05 TWR05-070405-002silvia Teeswater River DFO
26-Oct-05 TWR05-102605-001 Teeswater River DFO
23-Aug-59 CMNFI 1959-0334.9 Lac St-Pierre CMN
08-Oct-60 CMNFI 1960-0508A.9 Muskoka District CMN
09-Aug-72 CMNFI 1972-0179.17 Bear Creek CMN
12-Aug-72 CMNFI 1972-0197.14 Sydenham River CMN
13-Aug-72 CMNFI 1972-0201.17 Bear Creek CMN
14-Aug-72 CMNFI 1972-0207.12 Fish Creek CMN
02-Aug-73 CMNFI 1974-0046.12 Fish Creek CMN
04-Aug-73 CMNFI 1974-0056.9 Thames River CMN
04-Aug-73 CMNFI 1974-0058.3 Thames River CMN
16-Aug-79 CMNFI 1979-1009.1 Maitland River CMN
13-Sep-79 CMNFI 1979-1118.10 Thames River CMN
22-Jul-82 CMNFI 1982-0588.7 East Sydenham River CMN
24-Jul-82 CMNFI 1982-0604.6 Gregory Creek CMN
16-Aug-79 CMNFI 1986-0107.1 Maitland River CMN
16-Aug-79 CMNFI 1986-0108.1 Maitland River CMN
16-Aug-79 CMNFI 1986-0109.1 Maitland River CMN
16-Aug-79 CMNFI 1986-0110.1 Maitland River CMN
16-Aug-79 CMNFI 1986-0111.1 Maitland River CMN
19-Jun-86 CMNFI 1987-0223.8 Cedar Creek CMN
02-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
07-Aug-13 - Trent River MNRF
08-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
10-Sep-13 - Moira River MNRF
10-Sep-13 - Moira River MNRF
10-Sep-13 - Moira River MNRF
15-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
15-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
19-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
19-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
19-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
19-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
20-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
21-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
23-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
23-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
23-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
24-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
24-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
24-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
24-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
25-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
25-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
26-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
27-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
27-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
27-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
29-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
29-Aug-13 - Moira River MNRF
31-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
31-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
31-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
31-Jul-13 - Moira River MNRF
02-Sep-11 - Trent River MNRF
21-Jun-41 4061 Rivière Aux Outardes MFFP
21-Jun-41 24210 Ruisseau Norton MFFP
11-Jul-41 19902 Lac des Deux Montagnes MFFP
14-Sep-46 13084 Rivière Delisle MFFP
31-Jul-63 26 Rivière des Anglais MFFP
08-Sep-64 497 Lac des Deux Montagnes MFFP
10-Sep-64 457 Lac des Deux Montagnes MFFP
10-Sep-64 466 Lac des Deux Montagnes MFFP
Jun-65 4033 Rivière des Outaouais MFFP
30-Jul-65 4656 Rivière à la Raquette MFFP
18-Aug-65 3970 Rivière Ouest MFFP
05-Aug-70 399 Lac Brome MFFP
03-Aug-73 12294 Lac St-Louis MFFP
30-Jul-74 12226 Lac St-Louis MFFP
07-May-75 15435 Ruisseau St-Jean MFFP
09-May-75 15454 Ruisseau St-Jean MFFP
22-Jul-75 622 Rivière Châteauguay MFFP
24-Jul-75 629 Rivière Châteauguay MFFP
20-Jul-76 321 Rivière Châteauguay MFFP
26-Jul-76 858 Coulée Des Poissant MFFP
26-Jul-76 867 Ruisseau Turcot MFFP
26-Jul-76 869 La Grande Décharge MFFP
27-Jul-76 849 Ruisseau Pouliot MFFP
27-Jul-76 855 Le Grand Marais MFFP
12-Aug-76 45 Ruisseau Howe-Holmes MFFP
12-Sep-83 13098 Rivière Châteauguay MFFP
13-Sep-83 3898 Rivière Châteauguay MFFP
13-Sep-83 13100 Rivière Châteauguay MFFP
16-Sep-83 3832 Rivière Châteauguay MFFP
13-Jun-88 - Rivière des Outaouais MFFP
01-Jan-89 - Rivière des Outaouais MFFP
01-Jan-90 - Rivière des Outaouais MFFP
01-Jan-92 - Rivière des Outaouais MFFP
16-Sep-92 - Rivière des Outaouais MFFP
01-Nov-92 - Rivière des Outaouais MFFP
01-Nov-92 - Rivière des Outaouais MFFP
Nov-92 290 Lac St. Paul MFFP
13-Sep-93 12837 Rivière Châteauguay MFFP
1950 0422CS Thames River ROM
1924 08153 Georgian Bay ROM
10-Aug-36 09286 Ausable River ROM
15-Jul-36 09319 Sydenham River ROM
15-Jul-36 09352 Sydenham River ROM
15-Jul-36 09353 Sydenham River ROM
13/08/1936 09413 Medway Creek ROM
04-Aug-55 17566 Fanshawe Lake ROM
10-Aug-51 17887 Blacks Creek ROM
10-Aug-34 18183 Bayfield River ROM
1958 20121 Sauble River;Tara Creek;Sauble River Tributary ROM
1950 22582 Thames River ROM
17-Aug-53 23869 Avon River ROM
26-Aug-53 23870 Avon River ROM
Aug-50 24693 Thames River ROM
1947 24764 Ausable River ROM
1956 24839 Saugeen River ROM
23-Jul-49 24948 Nith River ROM
31-May-63 25752 Maitland River;South Maitland River ROM
07-Jul-69 26797 Ausable River ROM
29-Jun-69 26799 Lake Huron ROM
23-Jul-73 29885 Delisle River ROM
24-Jul-73 29943 Delisle River ROM
20-Jul-73 29945 Delisle River ROM
30-Jul-73 29967 Boyle Drain ROM
24-Jul-73 29970 Middle Maitland River ROM
22-Jul-73 29975 Middle Maitland River ROM
08-Aug-73 29977 Little Maitland River ROM
30-Jul-73 29980 Middle Maitland River ROM
07-Jun-73 30053 Raisin River ROM
07-Jun-73 30030 Raisin River Tributary ROM
08-Aug-73 30033 Little Maitland River ROM
11-Aug-73 30035 Little Maitland River ROM
17-Jun-73 30205 Middle Maitland River ROM
22-Aug-73 30236 Maitland River ROM
28-Jul-73 30253 Maitland River ROM
14-Aug-73 30287 Flat Creek ROM
27-Jul-73 30291 Kenny Creek ROM
22-Aug-73 30316 Maitland River ROM
15-Aug-73 30327 Maitland River ROM
16-Aug-73 30407 Horner Creek ROM
17-Aug-73 30409 Maitland River ROM
15-Aug-74 30759 Little Ausable River ROM
04-Jun-74 30807 Stoney Creek ROM
04-Jun-74 30814 Stoney Creek ROM
11-Jul-74 30864 Unnamed Creek ROM
21-Jul-74 30904 - ROM
18-Aug-74 30924 Unknown ROM
20-Aug-74 30937 Waubuno Creek ROM
05-Oct-77 36528 Severn River ROM
02-Jun-82 42077 Old Ausable Channel ROM
30-Jun-87 54904 Detroit River ROM
13-Aug-36 55433 Medway Creek ROM
10-Aug-89 56965 Sydenham River ROM
Aug-80 60235 Severn River ROM
28-Sep-97 71024 Old Ausable Channel ROM
28-Sep-97 71028 Old Ausable Channel ROM
28-Sep-97 71090 Old Ausable Channel ROM
27-Nov-97 71169 Flat Creek ROM
12-Nov-98 71815 Fish Creek ROM
20-Aug-98 71973 Otonabee River ROM
16-Jun-00 72369 Avon River ROM
16-Jun-00 72422 Avon River ROM
15-Jun-00 72423 Black Creek tributary ROM
19-Jun-01 72609 Sydenham River ROM
1983 75813 Thames River ROM
1983 75814 Thames River ROM
1983 75815 Thames River ROM
1983 75816 Thames River ROM
1983 75817 Thames River ROM
1983 75818 Thames River ROM
1983 75819 Thames River ROM
1983 75820 Thames River ROM
1983 75821 Thames River ROM
1983 75822 Thames River ROM
1983 75823 Thames River ROM
1983 75824 Thames River ROM
1983 75825 Thames River ROM
1983 75826 Thames River ROM
1983 75827 Thames River ROM
1983 75828 Thames River ROM
1983 75829 Thames River ROM
1983 75830 Thames River ROM
Sep-83 75831 Middle Thames River ROM
10-Jun-03 75862 Moira River ROM
28-Aug-02 76688 Ausable River ROM
29-Aug-02 76947 Ausable River ROM
28-Aug-02 76956 Ausable River ROM
29-Aug-02 76980 Ausable River ROM
04-Jul-05 77267 Teeswater River ROM
28-Aug-02 77413 Ausable River ROM
28-Aug-02 77432 Ausable River ROM
29-Aug-02 77667 Ausable River ROM
10-Jun-97 78730 Big Creek ROM
1983 78811 Thames River ROM
1983 78812 Thames River ROM
25-Aug-03 79781 Turkey Creek ROM
01-Jul-05 80239 Rivière Châteauguay ROM
20-Aug-03 80802 Detroit River ROM
02-Jun-04 81484 Belle River ROM
20-Jul-05 82612 Pefferlaw Brook ROM
27-Aug-08 82973 Gloucester Pool ROM
26-Oct-05 85023 Teeswater River ROM
18-Jul-05 89222 Pefferlaw Brook ROM
20-Jul-05 89225 Pefferlaw Brook ROM
27-Jul-10 89332 Sydenham River ROM
11-Oct-05 89416 Pefferlaw Brook ROM
02-Jul-02 93089 Fansher Creek ROM
26-Sep-02 96447 Old Ausable Channel ROM
30-Jul-02 99759 Fish Creek ROM
16-Sep-03 - East Sydenham River ROM
25-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
29-Jul-02 - Fish Creek ROM
26-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
30-Jul-02 - Medway Creek ROM
24-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
25-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
26-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
10-Sep-03 - North Sydenham River ROM
23-Sep-02 - Ausable Channel ROM
25-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
15-Sep-03 - East Sydenham River ROM
24-Jul-80 - North Thames River ROM
28-Sep-97 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
04-Nov-99 - Spring Creek ROM
15-Jun-04 - Fansher Creek ROM
28-Jul-04 - Whirl Creek ROM
25-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
25-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
25-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
26-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
23-Jul-80 - Flat Creek ROM
11-Sep-03 - North Sydenham River ROM
26-Apr-00 - Government Drain 5/6 ROM
11-Sep-03 - North Sydenham River ROM
24-Sep-02 - Ausable Channel ROM
26-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
15-Sep-03 - East Sydenham River ROM
28-Jul-04 - Black Creek ROM
02-Jun-75 - Medway Creek ROM
24-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
17-Jun-75 - Sydenham River ROM
26-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
16-Sep-03 - East Sydenham River ROM
26-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
07-Jun-82 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
24-Sep-02 - Ausable Channel ROM
06-Jun-82 - Little Bear Creek ROM
31-May-82 - Middle Thames River ROM
23-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
26-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
26-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
24-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
24-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
07-Jun-82 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
24-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
16-Sep-03 - East Sydenham River ROM
25-Sep-02 - Old Ausable Channel ROM
23-Sep-02 - Ausable Channel ROM
23-Sep-02 - Ausable Channel ROM
16-Jun-01 Released Sydenham River ROM
16-Jun-01 Released Sydenham River ROM
16-Jun-01 Released Black Creek ROM
15-Jun-00 Released Black Creek ROM
28-Sep-97 Released Old Ausable Channel ROM
18-Jun-01 Released Sydenham River ROM
17-Jun-01 Released Sydenham River ROM
08-Jul-02 - East Sydenham River ROM
23-May-02 - Black Creek ROM
26-Jun-02 - Bear Creek ROM
11-Jul-02 - Sydenham River East Branch ROM
24-Sep-02 96443 Ausable Channel ROM
26-Sep-02 96452 Old Ausable Channel ROM
24-Sep-02 99507 Old Ausable Channel ROM
06-Aug-02 99512 Belgrave Creek ROM
07-Aug-02 99514 Maitland River ROM
21-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-COLDWATER210714-002C Coldwater Creek DFO
21-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-COLDWATER210714-003C Coldwater Creek DFO
21-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-COLDWATER210714-005C Coldwater Creek DFO
22-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-COLDWATER220714-001A Coldwater Creek DFO
22-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-COLDWATER220714-002C Coldwater Creek DFO
23-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-COLDWATER230714-003C Coldwater Creek DFO
23-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-COLDWATER230714-004C Coldwater Creek DFO
23-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-COLDWATER230714-005C Coldwater Creek DFO
23-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-COLDWATER230714-006C Coldwater Creek DFO
24-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-COLDWATER240714-002B Coldwater Creek DFO
07-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-LPB070714-003C Long Point Bay DFO
15-Jul-14 2014-AC-MON-NAN150714-003A Nanticoke Creek DFO
25-Jun-14 2014-AC-MON-RONDEAU250614-002C Rondeau Bay DFO
2008-2014 18-3741-49489 Bob's Lake MNRF
2008-2014 17-6026-49666 Gloucester Pool MNRF
24-Jul-01 - Hardy Creek SCRCA
26-Jul-01 - Sydenham River SCRCA
4-Oct-02 - Sydenham River SCRCA
4-Oct-02 - Sydenham River SCRCA
12-Jul-04 - Coldstream Reservoir SCRCA
13-Jul-04 - Bridgeview Reservoir SCRCA
13-Jul-04 - Reservoir #1 SCRCA
15-Jul-04 - Area Reservoir SCRCA
6-Aug-04 - Strathroy Reservoir SCRCA
6-Aug-04 - Sydenham River SCRCA
21-Sep-05 - Sydenham East Br. SCRCA
20-Jul-09 - Sydenham East Br. SCRCA
20-Jul-09 - Sydenham River SCRCA
20-Jul-09 - Sydenham River SCRCA
21-Jul-09 - Spring Creek SCRCA

Appendix 2: Threats Calculator for Saskatchewan-Nelson DU

Threats Assessment Worksheet

Species or Ecosystem Scientific Name:
Northern Sunfish, Lepomis peltastes-SK-Nelson DU
Element ID
-
Elcode
-
Date:
27/01/2015
Assessor(s):
John Post, Tim Birt, Nick Mandrak, Jim Grant, Scott Reid, Marc-Antoine Couillard Moderator: Dwayne Lepitzki
References:
Teleconference 12 Feb 2015
Overall Threat Impact Calculation Help:
Threat Impact Threat Impact (descriptions) Level 1 Threat Impact Counts:
high range
Level 1 Threat Impact Counts:
low range
A Very High 0 0
B High 0 0
C Medium 0 0
D Low 1 1
- Calculated Overall Threat Impact: Low Low
Threats Assessment Worksheet Table.
# Threat Impact
(calculated)
Scope
(next
10 Yrs)
Severity
(10 Yrs
or
3 Gen.)
Timing Comments
1 Residential and commercial development - - - - -
1.1 Housing and urban areas - - - - not applicable
1.2 Commercial and industrial areas - - - - not applicabl
1.3 Tourism and recreation areas - - - - not applicable. No planned and KNOWN development in the next 10 yrs
2 Agriculture and aquaculture - - - - -
2.1 Annual and perennial non-timber crops - - - - not applicable. Considers physical impacts of agriculture on sunfish habitat (e.g. changes due to removal of riparian vegetation, channelization etc). Does not consider pollution/turbidity issues (see below).
2.2 Wood and pulp plantations - - - - not applicable
2.3 Livestock farming and ranching - - - - not applicable. No tramping known of.
2.4 Marine and freshwater aquaculture - - - - not applicable.
3 Energy production and mining - - - - -
3.1 Oil and gas drilling - - - - not applicable. No fracking
3.2 Mining and quarrying - - - - not applicable. Major mining out of range for this species.
3.3 Renewable energy - - - - not applicable.
4 Transportation and service corridors - - - - -
4.1 Roads and railroads - - - - not applicable.
4.2 Utility and service lines - - - - not applicable.
4.3 Shipping lanes - - - - not applicable.
4.4 Flight paths - - - - not applicable.
5 Biological resource use Negligible Negligible (<1%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) -
5.1 Hunting and collecting terrestrial animals - - - - not applicable.
5.2 Gathering terrestrial plants - - - - not applicable.
5.3 Logging and wood harvesting - - - - not applicable.
5.4 Fishing and harvesting aquatic resources Negligible Negligible (<1%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) Potential collection for aquarium trade and bait fishery bycatch but more likely a threat for other DU. Likely some angling mortality
6 Human intrusions and disturbance Negligible Small (1-10%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) -
6.1 Recreational activities - - - - not applicable
6.2 War, civil unrest and military exercises - - - - not applicable
6.3 Work and other activities Negligible Small (1-10%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) Exposure to fisheries scientific collection in 1-2% of the lakes.
7 Natural system modifications - - - - -
7.1 Fire and fire suppression - - - - not applicable
7.2 Dams and water management/use - - - - Some hydroelectric development. Likely new dams will be constructed in the next 10 yrs. but only a small number. Existing dams alter water regimes but unlikely to negatively impact Northern Sunfish.
7.3 Other ecosystem modifications - - - - not applicable. siltation and elevated levels of turbidity accounted for under 9.
8 Invasive and other problematic species and genes - - - - -
8.1 Invasive non-native/alien species - - - - Impact of Round Goby invasion unknown but not applicable to this DU.
8.2 Problematic native species - - - - hybridization is not an issue for this species. Is possible but impact is unknown
8.3 Introduced genetic material - - - - not applicable.
9 Pollution D-Low Small (1-10%) Moderate - Slight (1-30%) High (Continuing) -
9.1 Household sewage and urban waste water Negligible Negligible (<1%) Moderate - Slight (1-30%) High (Continuing) Chloride and pollutants are a major threat to this species. Urban development is generally highly correlated with increased concentrations of pollution but not high for this DU. Needs to be researched in terms of the actual level of impact of salt on this species.
9.2 Industrial and military effluents Negligible Negligible (<1%) Moderate (11-30%) High (Continuing) -
9.3 Agricultural and forestry effluents Negligible Small (1-10%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) Sedimentation is a big threat. Contaminants emanating from agricultural and other forms of development. Endocrine disruptors are present and problematic from pulp and paper mills. Present but unknown impact in this DU. Forestry effluents are negligible but remain a small threat more for this DU than the Eastern Ont DU. This threat is related more to forestry than agriculture. Negligible impact since forestry uses buffer zones to reduce impact.
9.4 Garbage and solid waste - - - - not applicable
9.5 Air-borne pollutants - - - - not applicable
9.6 Excess energy - - - - not applicable
10 Geological events - - - - -
10.1 Volcanoes - - - - not applicable
10.2 Earthquakes/ tsunamis - - - - not applicable
10.3 Avalanches/landslides - - - - not applicable
11 Climate change and severe weather - - - - -
11.1 Habitat shifting and alteration - - - - not applicable
11.2 Droughts - - - - not applicable
11.3 Temperature extremes - - - - not applicable. Warmer temperature likely positively affect this species. Centrarchids shifting northward - indication of warming of lakes.
11.4 Storms and flooding - - - - not applicable.

Classification of Threats adopted from IUCN-CMP, Salafsky et al. (2008).

Glossary

Impact
The degree to which a species is observed, inferred, or suspected to be directly or indirectly threatened in the area of interest. The impact of each threat is based on Severity and Scope rating and considers only present and future threats. Threat impact reflects a reduction of a species population or decline/degradation of the area of an ecosystem. The median rate of population reduction or area decline for each combination of scope and severity corresponds to the following classes of threat impact: Very High (75% declines), High (40%), Medium (15%), and Low (3%). Unknown: used when impact cannot be determined (e.g., if values for either scope or severity are unknown); Not Calculated: impact not calculated as threat is outside the assessment timeframe (e.g., timing is insignificant/negligible or low as threat is only considered to be in the past); Negligible: when scope or severity is negligible; Not a Threat: when severity is scored as neutral or potential benefit.
Scope
Proportion of the species that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within 10 years. Usually measured as a proportion of the species' population in the area of interest. (Pervasive = 71–100%; Large = 31–70%; Restricted = 11–30%; Small = 1–10%; Negligible < 1%).
Severity
Within the scope, the level of damage to the species from the threat that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within a 10-year or three-generation timeframe. Usually measured as the degree of reduction of the species' population. (Extreme = 71–100%; Serious = 31–70%; Moderate = 11–30%; Slight = 1–10%; Negligible < 1%; Neutral or Potential Benefit > 0%).
Timing
High = continuing; Moderate = only in the future (could happen in the short term [< 10 years or 3 generations]) or now suspended (could come back in the short term); Low = only in the future (could happen in the long term) or now suspended (could come back in the long term); Insignificant/Negligible = only in the past and unlikely to return, or no direct effect but limiting.

Appendix 3: Threats Calculator for Great Lakes-Upper St. Lawrence DU

Threats Assessment Worksheet

Species or Ecosystem Scientific Name:
Northern Sunfish, Lepomis peltastes_Great Lakes-St. Lawrence DU
Date:
27/01/2015
Assessor(s):
John Post, Tim Birt, Nick Mandrak, Jim Grant, Scott Reid, Marc-Antoine Couillard Moderator: Dwayne Lepitzki
References:
Teleconference 12 Feb 2015
Overall Threat Impact Calculation Help:
Threat Impact Threat Impact (descriptions) Level 1 Threat Impact Counts:
high range
Level 1 Threat Impact Counts:
low range
A Very High 0 0
B High 1 0
C Medium 0 1
D Low 1 1
- Calculated Overall Threat Impact: High Medium
Threats Assessment Worksheet Table.
# Threat Impact
(calculated)
Scope
(next
10 Yrs)
Severity
(10 Yrs
or
3 Gen.)
Timing Comments
1 Residential and commercial development - - - - -
1.1 Housing and urban areas - - - - not applicable
1.2 Commercial and industrial areas - - - - not applicable
1.3 Tourism and recreation areas - - - - not applicable. No planned and KNOWN development in the next 10 yrs.
2 Agriculture and aquaculture D-Low Restricted - Small (1-30%) Moderate (11-30%) High (Continuing) -
2.1 Annual and perennial non-timber crops D-Low Restricted - Small (1-30%) Moderate (11-30%) High (Continuing) Considers physical impacts of agriculture on sunfish habitat (e.g. changes due to removal of riparian vegetation, channelization etc). Does not consider pollution/turbidity issues (see below). Intensification of row crops in Southern Ontario. Lessening in livestock farming. Intensification of pork production in Quebec but most of range has already been affected. Less in low intensity beef production replaced with hog farming. Remaining range of this DU is most likely to be impacted (Guelph to west of Lake St. Clair) for conversion to row crop to soy bean. Some of Quebec range may be historical given the lack of recent surveying in those areas to confirm presence. Regardless, threat is included based on precautionary principle. Farmers will likely try to cultivate up to water edge. Headwater transformation to tile drains as well as some drain maintenance (channelization of habitat). Threats impact is moderate. Decline in beef production has occurred in the past 10 yrs. Expert opinion is that beef cattle production is unlikely to increase in the Quebec area over the next 10 yrs. Hog farming likely to continue to intensify. Threat impact is pollution rather than habitat loss or modification.
2.2 Wood and pulp plantations - - - - not applicable
2.3 Livestock farming and ranching - - - - No trampling known of.
2.4 Marine and freshwater aquaculture - - - - not applicable.
3 Energy production and mining - - - - -
3.1 Oil and gas drilling - - - - not applicable. No fracking
3.2 Mining and quarrying - - - - not applicable. Major mining out of range for this species.
3.3 Renewable energy - - - - not applicable.
4 Transportation and service corridors Negligible Negligible (<1%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) -
4.1 Roads and railroads Negligible Negligible (<1%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) Some road development planned in the next 10 yrs. in and around the Montreal area.
4.2 Utility and service lines - - - - not applicable.
4.3 Shipping lanes - - - - not applicable.
4.4 Flight paths - - - - not applicable.
5 Biological resource use Negligible Large (31-70%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) -
5.1 Hunting and collecting terrestrial animals - - - - Not applicable.
5.2 Gathering terrestrial plants - - - - Not applicable.
5.3 Logging and wood harvesting - - - - Not applicable.
5.4 Fishing and harvesting aquatic resources Negligible Large (31-70%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) Active licensed bait fishery in southern Ontario. Collection for aquarium trade also a threat. Live bait more or less prohibited in Quebec with new restrictive regulations pending. Likely some level of angling mortality.
6 Human intrusions and disturbance Negligible Large (31-70%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) -
6.1 Recreational activities Negligible Small (1-10%) Negligible (<1%) High (Continuing) Boating is a threat in Ontario and Quebec.
6.2 War, civil unrest and military exercises - - - - not applicable
6.3 Work and other activities Negligible Negligible (<1%) Extreme (71-100%) High (Continuing) -
7 Natural system modifications - - - - -
7.1 Fire and fire suppression - - - - not applicable
7.2 Dams and water management/use - - - - Beauharnois dam planned for development but unknown impact. Trent River and Moira River populations fragmented but unaffected by flow regime. Likely a few new dams will be constructed in the next 10 yrs. Existing dams alter water regimes but unlikely to negatively impact Northern Sunfish. Dams stabilize flow patterns that benefit the species. No known effect of the Beauharnois dam.
7.3 Other ecosystem modifications Negligible Negligible (<1%) Extreme (71-100%) High (Continuing) Phragmites present in Ontario as well as Quebec. Small range of this DU exposed to Phragmites. Impact is system modification from aquatic to terrestrial. Siltation and elevated turbidity accounted for under 9.
8 Invasive and other problematic species and genes Unknown Pervasive (71-100%) Unknown High (Continuing) -
8.1 Invasive non-native/alien species Unknown Restricted (11-30%) Unknown High (Continuing) Impact of Round Goby invasion unknown but applicable to this DU. Some cases have shown RG to be beneficial. Threat impact is therefore unknown.
8.2 Problematic native species Unknown Pervasive (71-100%) Unknown High (Continuing) Hybridization in Southern Ontario but no documented trends of decline in population. Therefore threat severity is unknown. Sterilization has not been recorded. More research on impacts of hybridization for this species is necessary.
8.3 Introduced genetic material - - - - not applicable.
9 Pollution BC High-Medium Large (31-70%) Serious - Moderate (11-70%) High (Continuing) -
9.1 Household sewage and urban waste water C-Medium Large (31-70%) Moderate (11-30%) High (Continuing) Chloride and pollutants are a major threat to this species. Urban development is generally highly correlated with increased concentrations of pollution but not high for this DU. Needs to be researched in terms of the actual level of impact of chloride on this species. Higher pollution impact for this DU due to proximity to urban centres. Nature of concentrations in effluent is different in this DU in comparison to the Sask-Nelson River DU. Turbidity influences severity of threat for pollutants
9.2 Industrial and military effluents Negligible Negligible (<1%) Moderate (11-30%) High (Continuing) PCB' s in Yamaska but levels declining. Possibility of Oil Refinery development. London range impacted by industrial effluent (general manufacturing) in the range of 100's of spills
9.3 Agricultural and forestry effluents BC High-Medium Large (31-70%) Serious - Moderate (11-70%) High (Continuing) Sedimentation is a big threat. Contaminants emanating from agricultural and other forms of development. Endocrine disruptors are present from pulp and paper mills. Present but unknown impact in this DU. Forestry effluents are negligible. Threat is related more to agriculture than forestry for this DU.
9.4 Garbage and solid waste - - - - not applicable
9.5 Air-borne pollutants - - - - not applicable
9.6 Excess energy - - - - not applicable
10 Geological events - - - - -
10.1 Volcanoes - - - - not applicable
10.2 Earthquakes/ tsunamis - - - - not applicable
10.3 Avalanches/landslides - - - - not applicable
11 Climate change and severe weather - - - - -
11.1 Habitat shifting and alteration - - - - not applicable
11.2 Droughts - - - - not applicable
11.3 Temperature extremes - - - - not applicable. Warmer temperature likely positive for this species. Centrarchids shifting northward- indication of climate warming.
11.4 Storms and flooding - - - - Changes to flow regimes. Northern Sunfish relies on low water flow. In one area, storm felled trees, resulted in additional woody debris, decreased flow, increased siltation, unknown impact.

Classification of Threats adopted from IUCN-CMP, Salafsky et al. (2008).

Page details

Date modified: