Fish Health in the Alberta Athabasca Oil Sands, Developing Baseline to Assess Future Change.

Transcription

1 Fish Health in the Alberta Athabasca Oil Sands, Developing Baseline to Assess Future Change. M.E. McMaster, H. Keith, G.R. Tetreault,C.J. Bennett, J. Ings, M. Evans, T. Clark, R.A. Frank, and J.L. Parrott

2 FISH Health - Program: The objectives of the fish component were to provide the necessary data to address key questions related to both environmental health of fish populations, and fish health issues relevant to use and consumption. Environmental health What is the current status of fish populations in the Lower Athabasca Region? What are the baseline conditions for fish populations? compare to future oil sands development? Are there significant changes since historical studies? Are there existing differences in fish populations among sites in the Lower Athabasca Region?

3 Field Health Assessment of Fish In Canada we have developed an Environmental Effects Monitoring Program for Pulp and Paper and Metal Mines which uses an adult fish survey to evaluate the health of the receiving environment. We have adapted these methods for use in the Oil Sands Region Mainstem large and small-bodied adult fish surveys to evaluate fish health Tributaries - small-bodied adult fish surveys to evaluate fish health

4 Effect Endpoints Measured Table 1-1: Fish population survey effect indicators and endpoints Effect Indicators Survival Growth (energy use) Reproduction (energy use) Condition (energy storage) Effect Endpoints Age Size-at-age (body weight to relative age) Relative fish gonad size (gonad weight to body weight) Condition (body weight to length) Relative liver size (liver weight to body weight)

5 Critical Effect Sizes Table 1-3: Critical effect sizes for pulp and paper environmental effects monitoring program Fish Effect Endpoints CES Relative fish gonad size ± 25% Relative liver size ± 25% Condition ± 10% Weight-at-age ± 25% Age ± 25%

6 Oil Sands Study Design JOSM Program was designed to collect 3 years of data to establish a baseline for which future change could be assessed. The three years of data would also be used to determine where additional studies or sites were needed and where sites could be dropped (no effects) until triggered back into the program through continued monitoring. The integrated Joint Oil Sands Monitoring Plan initial phase was Recommendations would then be put forward on how to proceed with the monitoring plan.

7 Fish Sampling Flo w Study Design Where possible, fish sites are selected to include a reference site outside of the oil sands deposit, within the deposit upstream of development, and within the deposit downstream of development Flo w Adults: Length, weight, age, LSI, GSI,, EROD, abnormalities, YOY: Growth, abnormalities, abundance 20 adult males 20 adult females YOY survey Active mining extraction area Oil sands deposit Up to 2 km Referen ce area LEGEN D Adult Fish Referenc e Area within OS deposit Young of Year Fish Tributary site

8 Mainstem Fish Sampling Small bodied trout perch Large bodied white sucker

9 Sites

10 EEM Endpoints

11 Additional Endpoints

12 CF 2011 White Sucker Poachers Northlands Develop Muskeg Male white sucker had increased condition at all downstream locations. GSI Males downstream of development had slightly reduced investment into gonadal development and increased liver size and EROD activity LSI

13 Analysis Between Years Now we have three years of this data including an additional upstream reference site at Athabasca (M0). We can look for impacts of pulp mill exposure as well as reference site variability outside of the deposit. We can also look for confirmation of changes documented in 2011 within the deposit and downstream of development.

14 Condition (%) Male CF A A + 2SD * *

15 Condition (%) Male CF a b b b A A AB B B * + 2SD + 10% *ǂ *ǂ *ǂ ǂ

16 GSI (%) Male GSI 8 7 * 6 a A A ǂ

17 GSI (%) Male GSI 8 + 2SD + 25% * a a a a A A A A A ǂ ǂ ǂ ǂ

18 LSI (%) Male LSI ab a b ab A A AB AB + 2SD + 25% B * * * * *

19 White Sucker Male and female white sucker demonstrate increases in condition that exceeded critical effect sizes used within other EEM programs, although not in General trend to increased liver size in fish downstream of the development, sometimes increased in fish collected within the deposit. Only females downstream of Muskeg in 2013 approach CES. Investment of energy into reproductive growth is within reference variability at sites downstream of development. Fish within the deposit generally have induced MFO activity that is slightly higher at sites downstream of development.

20 Trout Perch We also have trout perch data from these sites as well as additional sites to monitor fish health on a smaller scale (fish movement is less). In 2014 we sampled trout perch at 9 sites including at M9 within the park to begin to evaluate fish health further downstream. Similar evaluations of the data will be conducted.

21 Trout Perch sites 2014

22 Trout Perch

23 Condition Factor Wild Trout perch at Suncor Refinery Discharge were fatter (higher condition factor) versus upstream reference fish Condition Factor = weight / length * * Males Females 1.00 River flow 0.95 Reference MWWE Sawmill Suncor Muskeg Ells

24 Thank You Dec 2012

25 Integration Additional endpoints were also measured as part of our fish health studies. Reproductive endpoints circulating steroids, in vitro production, vitellogenin. Proteomic, metabolomic endpoints in blood and liver linked to source identification studies. Stable isotopes residency and food web links. Bile PAHs additional contaminants measures. Parasite community indicators of ecosystem health. Liver tumour studies in white sucker Abnormalities and contaminants in muscle and liver Benthic invertebrate community studies at all our fish study sites, water chemistry, sediment chemistry, hyalella and mussel caging, SPMD deployment, laboratory toxicology.

26 EROD Across Years

27 EROD Across Years

28 Endpoints The EEM program focuses on parameters measurable in groups of individuals, for several reasons: The approach offers a compromise between the sensitivity and reversibility of biochemical approaches, and the relevance of community-level parameters. Monitoring at the community level will miss reversible, important effects at the population level. Changes to fish growth, reproduction, condition or survival puts fish at risk, and therefore, focusing on these population level parameters addresses the overall objective of the Fisheries Act which is to protect fisheries resources. Knowing this level of risk is important to the management of ecosystems.