Lake Huron (ID: 1509)

Project last modified by dsalzer on October 06, 2009. Project Created By: The Nature Conservancy.

Download Project
See Associated Info (0)

Basic
Viability
Threats
Viability Assessment
Action Plan
Strategy Effectiveness
Indicators
Resources

Project Info

Contact Name:
Patrick Doran

Contact the project owner using:
Contact project owner.

ConPro's Form Emailer

Contact Organization:
The Nature Conservancy

Data Effective Date:
February 15, 2009

Sharing Status:
This project may be shared outside of
The Nature Conservancy.

Go To ·Objectives
·Targets
·Threats
·Strategies

Operational Unit(s):

Michigan

Ecoregion(s):

Great Lakes
Laurentian Great Lakes

Country(ies):

United States of America
Canada

Objectives

Name
By 20xx, reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by dams and barriers.
By 20xx, reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by housing and urban development and shoreline alteration
By 20xx, reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by invasive, non-native aquatic and terrestrial species
By 20xx,reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by agricultural, forestry, and urban non-point runoff

Targets

Focal Conservation Target	Target Type	Habitat Type
Nearshore (more info) Description: The aquatic ecosystem starting at zero metres (shoreline) and extending to 30 metres in depth, not including areas upstream from river mouths and riverine coastal wetlands.	Ecological System	Freshwater Lakes :: Permanent
Coastal Wetlands (more info) Description: Wetlands that have or historically had a hydrologic link to Lake Ontario and the Upper St. Lawrence River	Ecological System	Wetlands :: Permanent Freshwater Marshes/Pools
Coastal Terrestrial (more info) Description: Coastal uplands with natural cover up to 2 km inland OR to the extent of the (delineated) Great Lake coastal communities	Ecological System	Littoral
Aerial Migrants (more info) Description: Flying animals that use Lake Huron, including the associated wetlands and nearshore terrestrial communities, as stopover habitat on their migratory route	Species Assemblage: Animals	-
Islands (more info) Description: Includes both naturally formed and artificial islands that are 'naturalized' or support nested targets	Ecological System	Littoral
Offshore (more info) Description: water ecosystem beyond the 30m bathymetric contour from the mainland or islands (including reefs and shoals).	Ecological System	Freshwater Lakes :: Permanent
Native Migratory Fish (more info) Description: Fish that depend on migration to satisfy their life cycle (in particular, spawning, nursery, and rearing) and spend part of their life cycle in lakes and tributaries	Species Assemblage: Animals: Fish	Freshwater Lakes :: Permanent
dummy tgt	-	-

Threats

Threat (Common Taxonomy) ^*	Targets Threatened
Housing & Urban Development (Residential & Commercial Development :: Housing & Urban Areas )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Aerial Migrants Islands
Invasive non-native aquatic species (Invasive & Other Problematic Species & Genes :: Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Aerial Migrants Offshore Native Migratory Fish
Climate Change (Climate Change & Severe Weather :: Habitat Shifting & Alteration )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Aerial Migrants Islands Offshore Native Migratory Fish
Invasive non-native terrestrial species (Invasive & Other Problematic Species & Genes :: Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species )	Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Islands
Agricultural, forestry, and urban non point runoff (Pollution :: Agricultural & Forestry Effluents )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Offshore Native Migratory Fish
Airborne pollutants (Pollution :: Air-Borne Pollutants )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Offshore Native Migratory Fish
Dams & other barriers (Natural System Modifications :: Dams & Water Management/Use )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Native Migratory Fish
Incompatible resource management (Residential & Commercial Development :: Housing & Urban Areas )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Islands Offshore Native Migratory Fish
Renewable & non-renewable energy (Energy Production & Mining :: Renewable Energy )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Aerial Migrants Islands Native Migratory Fish
Navigation & recreational dredging & blasting (Human Intrusions & Disturbance :: Work & Other Activities )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Offshore Native Migratory Fish
Shoreline alterations (Natural System Modifications :: Other Ecosystem Modifications )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Aerial Migrants Islands
Urban, industrial and agricultural point sources (Pollution :: Garbage & Solid Waste )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Offshore Native Migratory Fish
Mining & quarrying (Energy Production & Mining :: Mining & Quarrying )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Islands
Contaminated sediments (Pollution :: Industrial & Military Effluents )	Nearshore Coastal Wetlands Offshore
Agricultural conversion (Agriculture & Aquaculture :: Annual & Perennial Non-Timber Crops )	Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Aerial Migrants
Recreational Activities (Human Intrusions & Disturbance :: Recreational Activities )	Coastal Wetlands Coastal Terrestrial Aerial Migrants

^* For information on the common taxonomy of threats, see http://conservationmeasures.org/CMP/IUCN/.

Strategies

Strategy (Common Taxonomy)	Threats Addressed
Conduct economic assessments of ecosystems services and educate public and gov't on monetary value of ecological goods and services ( Education & Awareness :: Awareness & Communications )	Agricultural, forestry, and urban non point runoff
Develop real world adaptive mgmt sites ( Land/Water Management :: Site/Area Management )	Invasive non-native aquatic species Invasive non-native terrestrial species
Enhance fish passage ( Land/Water Management :: Site/Area Management )	Dams & other barriers
Identify priority areas and promote targeted BMPs accordingly ( Undefined :: Undefined )	Agricultural, forestry, and urban non point runoff
Improve field services/tech support ( Land/Water Management :: Site/Area Management )	Agricultural, forestry, and urban non point runoff
Manage to mimic natural processes ( Land/Water Management :: Habitat & Natural Process Restoration )	Dams & other barriers
Prevent barriers ( Land/Water Management :: Site/Area Management )	Dams & other barriers
R&D - management options and tools ( Land/Water Management :: Site/Area Management )	Invasive non-native aquatic species Invasive non-native terrestrial species
Replace dams with low-head barrier with passage where appropriate ( Land/Water Management :: Site/Area Management )	Dams & other barriers
Restore native populations of aquatic fish spp ( Species Management :: Species Recovery )	Invasive non-native aquatic species

Viability Summary

Conservation Targets		Landscape Context		Condition		Size		Viability Rank
Conservation Targets		Grade	Weight	Grade	Weight	Grade	Weight	Viability Rank
1	Nearshore	Poor	1.0	Fair	1.0	-	1.0	Fair
2	Coastal Wetlands	Poor	1.0	-	1.0	Good	1.0	Fair
3	Coastal Terrestrial	Poor	1.0	Fair	1.0	Good	1.0	Fair
4	Aerial Migrants	Good	1.0	Very Good	1.0	Very Good	1.0	Very Good
5	Islands	-	1.0	Good	1.0	-	1.0	Good
6	Offshore	Good	1.0	Poor	1.0	Poor	1.0	Fair
7	Native Migratory Fish	Fair	1.0	-	1.0	Poor	1.0	Fair
8	dummy tgt	-	1.0	-	1.0	-	1.0	-
Project Biodiversity Health Rank								Fair

Threat Summary

Project-specific Threats (Common Taxonomy *)	Aerial Migrants	Coastal Terrestrial	Coastal Wetlands	dummy tgt	Islands	Native Migratory Fish	Nearshore	Offshore	Overall Threat Rank
Housing & Urban Development (Housing & Urban Areas)	Very High	Very High	Very High	-	High	-	Very High	-	Very High
Invasive non-native aquatic species (Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species)	Medium	Low	Very High	-	-	Medium	Very High	Very High	Very High
Climate Change (Habitat Shifting & Alteration)	High	Very High	High	-	High	Medium	High	High	Very High
Invasive non-native terrestrial species (Invasive Non-Native/Alien Species)	-	High	High	-	Medium	-	-	-	High
Agricultural, forestry, and urban non point runoff (Agricultural & Forestry Effluents)	-	Low	High	-	-	Low	High	Low	High
Airborne pollutants (Air-Borne Pollutants)	-	Low	High	-	-	Low	Medium	Low	Medium
Dams & other barriers (Dams & Water Management/Use)	-	-	Low	-	-	High	Medium	-	Medium
Incompatible resource management (Housing & Urban Areas)	-	Low	Low	-	Low	Medium	Low	Medium	Medium
Renewable & non-renewable energy (Renewable Energy)	Medium	Medium	Low	-	Low	Low	Low	-	Medium
Navigation & recreational dredging & blasting (Work & Other Activities)	-	-	Medium	-	-	Low	Medium	Low	Medium
Shoreline alterations (Other Ecosystem Modifications)	Low	Low	Medium	-	Low	-	Low	-	Low
Urban, industrial and agricultural point sources (Garbage & Solid Waste)	-	Medium	Low	-	-	Low	Low	Low	Low
Mining & quarrying (Mining & Quarrying)	-	Low	Low	-	Medium	-	Low	-	Low
Contaminated sediments (Industrial & Military Effluents)	-	-	Low	-	-	-	Low	Medium	Low
Agricultural conversion (Annual & Perennial Non-Timber Crops)	Low	Low	Low	-	-	-	-	-	Low
Recreational Activities (Recreational Activities)	Low	Low	Low	-	-	-	-	-	Low
Threat Status for Targets and Project	High	Very High	Very High	-	High	Medium	Very High	High	Very High

Project Resources

Categories & Measures		Score
People
	Staff Leadership	-
	Multidisciplinary Team	-
People Average		-
Internal Resources
	Institutional Learning	-
	Funding	-
Internal Resources Average		-
External Resources
	Social/Legal Framework for Conservation	-
	Community and Constituency Support	-
External Resources Average		-
Overall Project Resource Rank

Assessment of Target Viability

Conservation Target	Key Attribute (Category)	Indicator	Current Indicator Measurement	Rating Comments: (Poor, Fair Good Very Good)	Current Rating and Date	Desired Rating and Date
Nearshore	Community architecture (Condition)	Native fish species richness ¹	-	Poor: Lack of native species diversity Fair: Dominated by a variety of native species Good: Moderate diversity of native spp Very Good: Diverse array of fish to support healthy, productive fish communities	-	-
Nearshore	Community architecture (Condition)	Abundance and distribution of exotics ²	-	Poor: Increasing rate of exotics introduction, establishment Fair: Reduction in introduction rate and maintain current levels of abundance and distribution of existing exotics Good: Reduce rate of new introductions, reduce abundance and distribution of existing exotics Very Good: Preventing establishment of new exotics, no net gain in existing exotic distribution	Fair	-
Nearshore	Community architecture (Condition)	Walleye population five-year average annual Yield ³	-	Poor: Yield <350,000 kg Fair: Yield 350,000 - 700,000 kg Good: Yield 700,000 - 1,000,000 kg Very Good: Yield >1,000,000	-	-
Nearshore	Community architecture (Condition)	Yellow perch population five-year average annual Yield	-	Poor: Yield <250,000 kg Fair: Yield 250,000 - 500,000 kg Good: Yield 500,000 - 750,000 kg Very Good: Yield >750,000	-	-
Nearshore	Community architecture (Condition)	Lake sturgeon status	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: Removal from Threatened status in US waters(?) Very Good: -	Poor	-
Nearshore	Food web linkages (Condition)	Zooplankton mean individual size and biomass ⁴	-	Poor: Low levels of zooplankton Fair: Moderate level of zooplankton, insufficient to maintain fish levels at binational fisheries objectives Good: Populations sufficient to maintain prey and predator fish at levels consistent with binational fisheries objectives Very Good: Sufficient size and biomass to support healthy and diverse fish communities	-	-
Nearshore	Food web linkages (Condition)	Hexagenia densities in softshore mesotrophic waters	-	Poor: <9 nymphs per m-2 Fair: 9-63 nymphs per m-2 Good: 63-136 nymphs per m-2 Very Good: >136 nymphs per m-2	-	-
Nearshore	Spawning habitat quality and accessibility (Condition)	River spawning/migratory fish habitat quality ⁵	Some areas of good connectivity (ON), some fair (MI)	Poor: Lack of connectivity to spawning habitat; migratory species not reproducing Fair: Some connectivity to spawning habitat; low reproduction Good: Some impairment to connectvity; moderate reproduction Very Good: No impairment to connectivity; migratory species reproducing well	Fair ⁶ Feb 15, 2009	-
Nearshore	Spawning habitat quality and accessibility (Condition)	Nearshore species spawning/ recruitment success ⁷	-	Poor: Very little recruitment of key indicator species Fair: Some recruitment of key indicator species Good: Good recruitment of key indicator species Very Good: Very good recruitment of key indicator species	-	-
Nearshore	Spawning habitat quality and accessibility (Condition)	Spawning/ recruitment success for nearshore spawning offshore species ⁸	-	Poor: Very little recruitment of lake trout and lake whitefish at key nearshore locations Fair: some recruitment of key indicator species annually Good: good recruitment of key indicator species Very Good: "very good" recruitment of lake trout and lake whitefish at key nearshore locations	-	-
Nearshore	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	Artificial Shoreline Hardening Index--northern Lake Huron ⁹	-	Poor: >40% Fair: 30 - 40% Good: 20 - 30% Very Good: <20%	Very Good	-
Nearshore	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	Artificial Shoreline Hardening Index--southern Lake Huron ¹⁰	-	Poor: >40% Fair: 30 - 40% Good: 20 - 30% Very Good: <20%	Fair	-
Nearshore	Coastal land use ¹¹ (Landscape Context)	Degree of development (% urban w/in 2 km)--northern Lake Huron ¹²	Overall, good, but southern portions are likely "fair", some northern portions "very good"	Poor: >35% Fair: >25 - 35% Good: 15 - 25% Very Good: <15%	Very Good	-
Nearshore	Coastal land use ¹³ (Landscape Context)	Degree of development (% urban w/in 2 km)--southern Lake Huron ¹⁴	-	Poor: >35% Fair: >25 - 35% Good: 15 - 25% Very Good: <15%	Fair	-
Nearshore	Landscape pattern (mosaic) & structure (Landscape Context)	Native vegetation cover/SAV distribution in protected embayments and soft sediment areas ¹⁵	-	Poor: Absence or near absence of vegetation cover/critical habitat for small fish and YOY Fair: Moderate level of vegetation cover (emergent and submergent) Good: Sufficient levels of vegetative cover for critical faunal species habitat Very Good: Diverse plant assemblages, SAV dominant	Fair ¹⁶ Feb 15, 2009	-
Nearshore	Soil / sediment stability & movement (land context) ¹⁷ (Landscape Context)	Bed load traps and groins (number of structures per length of shoreline)--northern Lake Huron ¹⁸	Overall, good, but southern portions are likely "fair", some northern portions "very good"	Poor: >300 structures/ 100 km shoreline Fair: >200-300 structures/ 100 km shoreline Good: 30-200 structures/ 100 km shoreline Very Good: <30 stuctures/ 100-km shoreline	Good	-
Nearshore	Soil / sediment stability & movement (land context) (Landscape Context)	Bed load traps and groins (number of structures per length of shoreline)--southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: >300 structures/ 100 km shoreline Fair: >200-300 structures/ 100 km shoreline Good: 30-200 structures/ 100 km shoreline Very Good: <30 stuctures/ 100-km shoreline	Fair	-
Nearshore	Soil / sediment stability & movement (land context) (Landscape Context)	Erosion and deposition rates--northern Lake Huron ¹⁹	-	Poor: High soil erosion by water risk (>22 t/ha/yr) Fair: Moderate soil erosion by water risk (11-22 t/ha/yr) Good: Low soil erosion by water risk (6-11 t/ha/yr) Very Good: Very low soil erosion by water risk (<6 t/ha/yr)	Very Good ²⁰ Feb 15, 2009	-
Nearshore	Soil / sediment stability & movement (land context) (Landscape Context)	Erosion and deposition rates--southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: High soil erosion by water risk (>22 t/ha/yr) Fair: Moderate soil erosion by water risk (11-22 t/ha/yr) Good: Low soil erosion by water risk (6-11 t/ha/yr) Very Good: Very low soil erosion by water risk (<6 t/ha/yr)	Poor	-
Nearshore	Water chemistry (Landscape Context)	Phosphorous concentrations & dynamics ²¹	-	Poor: >30 µg/L for any nearshore location or an average across the nearshore lakewide of >7.5 µg/L Fair: up to 30 µg/L at any nearshore location, and an average across the nearshore lakewide of 5.0-7.5 µg/L Good: <15 µg/L for each nearshore location, and an average across the nearshore lakewide of 5.0-7.5 µg/L Very Good: <15 µg/L for each nearshore location, and an average across the nearshore lakewide of <5.0 µg/L	Fair Mar 15, 2009	-
Nearshore	Water level fluctuations (Landscape Context)	Annual range of lake level ²²	-	Poor: 30-40 yr cycle shows severe trend in either water level, wavelength, or amplitude; Low level crisis = 176.02, High level crisis = 177.15 Fair: 30-40 yr cycle shows significant trend in either water level, wavelength, or amplitude; Low level alert = 176.23, High level alert =176.99 Good: 30-40 yr cycle shows moderate trend in either water level, wavelength, or amplitude Very Good: 30-40 yr cycle reflects consistency in water levels, wavelength and amplitude of highs and lows; Long-term average (since 1900) = 176.4	Poor Feb 15, 2009	-
Coastal Wetlands	Abundance and diversity of wetland-dependent bird species (Condition)	Marsh Bird IBI ²³	-	Poor: IBI of 0-33 Fair: IBI of 33-67 Good: IBI of 67-100 Very Good: -	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Community architecture (Condition)	Area of wet meadow/meadow marsh ²⁴	-	Poor: Wet meadows highly restricted in extent / frequency Fair: Wet meadows extent and frequency restricted Good: Moderate amount of wet meadows Very Good: Extensive wet meadows in response to low lake levels in growing season	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Community architecture (Condition)	Native plant species richness ²⁵	-	Poor: Predominantly invasive exotics, lack of native spp diversity Fair: Dominated by native spp. with some invasives and/or lack of native spp diversity Good: Dominated by native vegetation (moderate diversity), low #s of invasive plant species and low levels of coverage Very Good: Diverse assemblages of native vegetation only	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Fish Habitat Quality (Condition)	Wetland Fish Index (WFI) of wetland quality ²⁶	-	Poor: WFI of -3 to -1 Fair: WFI of -1 to 0 Good: WFI of 0 to 1 Very Good: WFI of 1 to 3	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Presence / abundance of keystone species (Condition)	Muskrat abundance ²⁷	-	Poor: Wetland average house density (ahd) <0.5/ha Fair: Wetland ahd of 0.5 - 1.5/ha Good: Wetland ahd of 1.5/ha Very Good: Wetland ahd of >1.5/ha	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Presence / abundance of keystone species ²⁸ (Condition)	Esocid index	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Primary productivity (Condition)	Biomass of algae ²⁹	-	Poor: High planktonic and benthic algal biomass (PC1 >2.5) Fair: High to moderate planktonic and benthic algal biomass (PC1 of 0 to 2.5) Good: Moderate to low planktonic and benthic algal biomass (PC1 of 2.5 to 0) Very Good: Low planktonic and benthic algal biomass (PC1 of -2.5 or lower)	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Species composition / dominance (Condition)	Wetland macrophyte index	-	Poor: <2 Fair: 3 Good: 4 Very Good: 5	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Trophic structure (Condition)	Wetland Zooplankton Index (WZI) ³⁰	-	Poor: <1.75 Fair: 1.75 - 2.75 Good: > 2.75 - 3.75 Very Good: >3.75	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	percentage of area 2-5 km from lake that is in natural land cover in southern Lake Huron ³¹	-	Poor: <40% natural cover Fair: 40 - 60% natural cover Good: 60 - 80% natural cover Very Good: 80%+ natural cover	Poor	-
Coastal Wetlands	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	percentage of area 2-5 km from lake that is in natural land cover in northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: <40% natural cover Fair: 40 - 60% natural cover Good: 60 - 80% natural cover Very Good: 80%+ natural cover	Very Good	-
Coastal Wetlands	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	Artificial Shoreline Hardening Index--northern Lake Huron ³²	-	Poor: >40% Fair: 30 - 40% Good: 20 - 30% Very Good: <20%	Good	-
Coastal Wetlands	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	Artificial Shoreline Hardening Index--southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: >40% Fair: 30 - 40% Good: 20 - 30% Very Good: <20%	Fair	-
Coastal Wetlands	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	Percent natural land cover within 2 km of shoreline in northern Lake Huron ³³	-	Poor: <40% natural cover Fair: 40 - 60% natural cover Good: 60 - 80% natural cover Very Good: 80%+ natural cover	Very Good	-
Coastal Wetlands	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	Percent natural land cover within 2 km of shoreline in southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: <40% natural cover Fair: 40 - 60% natural cover Good: 60 - 80% natural cover Very Good: 80%+ natural cover	Fair	-
Coastal Wetlands	Water level fluctuations (Landscape Context)	Annual range of lake level ³⁴	-	Poor: 30-40 yr cycle shows severe trend in either water level, wavelength, or amplitude; Low level crisis = 176.02, High level crisis = 177.15 Fair: 30-40 yr cycle shows significant trend in either water level, wavelength, or amplitude; Low level alert = 176.23, High level alert =176.99 Good: 30-40 yr cycle shows moderate trend in either water level, wavelength, or amplitude Very Good: 30-40 yr cycle reflects consistency in water levels, wavelength and amplitude of highs and lows; Long-term average (since 1900) = 176.4	Poor ³⁵	-
Coastal Wetlands	Water level fluctuations (Landscape Context)	Annual range and timing of lake level (seasonal fluctuations) ³⁶	-	Poor: Lake levels constant throughout the year Fair: Limited variation in water levels throughout the year (magnitude of seasonal fluctuations of 0.6m) Good: Lower levels in winter and higher levels in summer (magnitude of seasonal fluctuation 0.22m - 1.10m) Very Good: Water levels lowest in winter and highest in early summer	Fair ³⁷	-
Coastal Wetlands	Water level fluctuations (Landscape Context)	Hydroperiod (period of time when wetland is covered with water) ³⁸	-	Poor: Lake levels constant all the time Fair: Interannual variation <1 m Good: Periodic lows during growing season Very Good: Reaching low of 73 m at x locations	Poor	-
Coastal Wetlands	Water level fluctuations (Landscape Context)	Vegetative composition (area of shrub, sedge meadow, emergent, SAV) ³⁹	-	Poor: Wetlands occupy more narrow zone, dominated by one spp or community; invasion of woody vegetation Fair: 2-3 vegetation zones are represented in a wide wetland Good: 3-4 vegetation zones are represented in a somewhat narrower wetland Very Good: 4-5 vegetation zones are represented in a wide wetland	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Water quality (Landscape Context)	Water Quality Index (WQI) for wetland quality ⁴⁰	-	Poor: WQI of -3 to -1 Fair: WQI of -1 to 0 Good: WQI of 0 to 1 Very Good: WQI of 1 to 3	-	-
Coastal Wetlands	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	Total area of all wetlands--southern Lake Huron ⁴¹	-	Poor: greater loss from current status Fair: some percentage loss from current status Good: Current area Very Good: historic area	Good	-
Coastal Wetlands	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	Total area of all wetlands--northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: greater loss from current status Fair: some percentage loss from current status Good: Current area Very Good: historic area	Good	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Community architecture ⁴² (Condition)	Native plant index--northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: Dominated by invasive non-native and opportunistic native species Fair: Dominated by non-native species with some invasive, mainly opportunistic native species Good: Dominated by native species with some non-natives and invasive spp Very Good: Dominated by native species, including conservative species, few non-natives	Good	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Community architecture (Condition)	Native plant index--southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: Dominated by invasive non-native and opportunistic native species Fair: Dominated by non-native species with some invasive, mainly opportunistic native species Good: Dominated by native species with some non-natives and invasive spp Very Good: Dominated by native species, including conservative species, few non-natives	Fair	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Condition of nested targets ⁴³ (Condition)	EO ranks of selected nested targets, northern Lake Huron ⁴⁴	-	Poor: <30% A or B ranked Fair: 30-50% A or B ranked Good: >50-70% A or B ranked Very Good: >70% A or B ranked	Good Mar 15, 2009	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Condition of nested targets (Condition)	EO ranks of selected nested targets, southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: <30% A or B ranked Fair: 30-50% A or B ranked Good: >50-70% A or B ranked Very Good: >70% A or B ranked	Poor	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Soil / sediment stability & movement (condition) (Condition)	Artificial Shoreline Hardening Index--northern Lake Huron ⁴⁵	-	Poor: >40% Fair: 30 - 40% Good: 20 - 30% Very Good: <20%	Good	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Soil / sediment stability & movement (condition) (Condition)	Artificial Shoreline Hardening Index--southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: >40% Fair: 30 - 40% Good: 20 - 30% Very Good: <20%	Fair	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Soil / sediment stability & movement (condition) (Condition)	Bed load traps and groins (number of structures per length of shoreline)--northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: >300 structures/ 100 km shoreline Fair: >200-300 structures/ 100 km shoreline Good: 30-200 structures/ 100 km shoreline Very Good: <30 stuctures/ 100-km shoreline	Fair	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Soil / sediment stability & movement (condition) (Condition)	Bed load traps and groins (number of structures per length of shoreline)--southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: >300 structures/ 100 km shoreline Fair: >200-300 structures/ 100 km shoreline Good: 30-200 structures/ 100 km shoreline Very Good: <30 stuctures/ 100-km shoreline	Good	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	percentage of area 2-10 km from lake that is in natural land cover in northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: <40% natural cover Fair: 40 - 60% natural cover Good: 60 - 80% natural cover Very Good: 80%+ natural cover	Very Good	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	percentage of area 2-10 km from lake that is in natural land cover in southern Lake Huron ⁴⁶	-	Poor: <40% natural cover Fair: 40 - 60% natural cover Good: 60 - 80% natural cover Very Good: 80%+ natural cover	Poor	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Connectivity among communities & ecosystems (Landscape Context)	road density (km road / km2) -northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: >2 km/ km2 Fair: 1.25-2 km/ km2 Good: 1.25-0.5 km/ km2 Very Good: <0.5 km/ km2	Good	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Connectivity among communities & ecosystems (Landscape Context)	road density (km road / km2) -southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: >2 km/ km2 Fair: 1.25-2 km/ km2 Good: 1.25-0.5 km/ km2 Very Good: <0.5 km/ km2	Fair	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Landscape pattern (mosaic) & structure (Landscape Context)	Building density within 100 m of coast (number of buildings/ha)--northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: >2 buildings/ ha Fair: 1-2 buildings/ ha Good: 0.5-1 buildings/ ha Very Good: <0.5 buildings/ ha	-	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Landscape pattern (mosaic) & structure (Landscape Context)	Building density within 100 m of coast (number of buildings/ha)--southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: >2 buildings/ ha Fair: 1-2 buildings/ ha Good: 0.5-1 buildings/ ha Very Good: <0.5 buildings/ ha	-	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Water level fluctuations (Landscape Context)	Annual range of lake level ⁴⁷	-	Poor: 30-40 yr cycle shows severe trend in either water level, wavelength, or amplitude; Low level crisis = 176.02, High level crisis = 177.15 Fair: 30-40 yr cycle shows significant trend in either water level, wavelength, or amplitude; Low level alert = 176.23, High level alert =176.99 Good: 30-40 yr cycle shows moderate trend in either water level, wavelength, or amplitude Very Good: 30-40 yr cycle reflects consistency in water levels, wavelength and amplitude of highs and lows; Long-term average (since 1900) = 176.4	Poor Feb 15, 2009	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	Percent natural land cover within 2 km of shoreline in northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: <40% natural cover Fair: 40 - 60% natural cover Good: 60 - 80% natural cover Very Good: 80%+ natural cover	Very Good	-
Coastal Terrestrial	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	Percent natural land cover within 2 km of shoreline in southern Lake Huron	-	Poor: <40% natural cover Fair: 40 - 60% natural cover Good: 60 - 80% natural cover Very Good: 80%+ natural cover	Fair	-
Aerial Migrants	Population (Condition)	number of fall migrants--SLH ⁴⁸	-	Poor: rare/rarely used Fair: uncommon/infrequently used Good: common/frequently used Very Good: abundant/always used	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Population (Condition)	number of spring migrants--SLH ⁴⁹	-	Poor: rare/rarely used Fair: uncommon/infrequently used Good: common/frequently used Very Good: abundant/always used	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Population (Condition)	number of fall migrants--NLH	-	Poor: rare/rarely used Fair: uncommon/infrequently used Good: common/frequently used Very Good: abundant/always used	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Population (Condition)	number of spring migrants--NLH	-	Poor: rare/rarely used Fair: uncommon/infrequently used Good: common/frequently used Very Good: abundant/always used	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Spawning habitat quality and accessibility (Condition)	Mean patch size of landbird stopover habitat with priority score >2 in southern Lake Huron ⁵⁰	-	Poor: <20 ha Fair: 20-100 ha Good: >100-200 ha Very Good: >200 ha	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Spawning habitat quality and accessibility (Condition)	Mean patch size of landbird stopover habitat with priority score >2 in northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: <20 ha Fair: 20-100 ha Good: >100-200 ha Very Good: >200 ha	Very Good	-
Aerial Migrants	Anthropogenic disturbance of habitat ⁵¹ (Landscape Context)	Amount of recreation and other activities on the shoreline and in water in southern Lake Huron ⁵²	-	Poor: very high activity Fair: high activity Good: moderate activity Very Good: low activity	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Anthropogenic disturbance of habitat (Landscape Context)	Amount of recreation and other activities on the shoreline and in water in northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: very high activity Fair: high activity Good: moderate activity Very Good: low activity	Good	-
Aerial Migrants	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	percentage of area 2-5 km from lake that is in natural land cover in southern Lake Huron ⁵³	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: >40	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Coastal land use (Landscape Context)	percentage of area 2-5 km from lake that is in natural land cover in northern Lake Huron	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: >40	Very Good	-
Aerial Migrants	Management Status (Size)	percentage of high priority habitat (>9 total score) that is in conservation management--NLH ⁵⁴	-	Poor: <50 Fair: 50-80 Good: >80 - <100 Very Good: 100	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Management Status (Size)	percentage of high priority habitat (>9 total score) that is in conservation management--SLH	-	Poor: <50 Fair: 50-80 Good: >80 - <100 Very Good: 100	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	percentage of southern Lake Huron basin that scores >2 for landbirds ⁵⁵	-	Poor: <10 Fair: 40116 Good: >30-50 Very Good: >50	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	Amount of habitat for migrating bats--NLH	-	Poor: very little Fair: not enough Good: enough Very Good: abundant	Very Good	-
Aerial Migrants	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	Amount of habitat for migrating bats--SLH	-	Poor: very little Fair: not enough Good: enough Very Good: abundant	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for landbirds--NLH ⁵⁶	-	Poor: <10 Fair: 10-30 Good: >30 - 50 Very Good: >50	Very Good	-
Aerial Migrants	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for landbirds--SLH	-	Poor: <10 Fair: 10-30 Good: >30 - 50 Very Good: >50	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for shorebirds--NLH ⁵⁷	-	Poor: <5 Fair: 5-10 Good: 10-40 Very Good: >40	Very Good	-
Aerial Migrants	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for shorebirds--SLH	-	Poor: <5 Fair: 5-10 Good: 10-40 Very Good: >40	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for waterfowl--NLH ⁵⁸	-	Poor: <30 Fair: 30-50 Good: >50 - 80 Very Good: >80	Very Good	-
Aerial Migrants	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for waterfowl--SLH	-	Poor: <30 Fair: 30-50 Good: >50 - 80 Very Good: >80	-	-
Aerial Migrants	Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems (Size)	percentage of northern Lake Huron basin that scores >2 for landbirds	-	Poor: <10 Fair: 40116 Good: >30-50 Very Good: >50	Very Good	-
Islands	Human influence (Condition)	Docking sites ⁵⁹	-	Poor: >2 docks/ ha Fair: 1-2 docks/ ha Good: 0.5-1 dock/ ha Very Good: <0.5 docks/ ha	Good Mar 15, 2009	-
Islands	Human influence ⁶⁰ (Condition)	Average composite threat ranking ⁶¹	-	Poor: >2 Fair: >1.5 - 2 Good: >1 - 1.5 Very Good: 1	Good Mar 15, 2009	-
Islands	Species composition / dominance (Condition)	Browse index ⁶²	-	Poor: >50% of stems are browsed, seedling hedged, <15 cm tall Fair: >50% of stems are browsed, seedlings hedged, 15 cm ≤ saplings ≤ 180 cm Good: >50% of stems are browsed, seedlings not hedged 15 cm ≤ sapling ≤ 180 cm Very Good: 1-50% of stems are browsed	- ⁶³ Mar 15, 2009	-
Islands	Population size & dynamics (size) (Size)	Consistency of colonial waterbird use ⁶⁴	-	Poor: No known use (suitable habitat) Fair: Irregular use (1-2 times/ decade) Good: Regular use (3-4 times / decade) Very Good: Consistent use (2-3 times since the 1970s or consistently during the 1990s	- ⁶⁵ Mar 15, 2009	-
Islands	Population size & dynamics (size) (Size)	Numbers of colonial nesting waterbirds (Herring & Ring-billed Gulls) ⁶⁶	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: >1000 Herring Gulls > 10,000 Ring-billed Gulls Very Good: -	- ⁶⁷ Mar 15, 2009	-
Islands	Population size & dynamics (size) (Size)	Productivity of colonial waterbird nests* ⁶⁸	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: >25% of nest produce 1+ fledglings Very Good: -	- ⁶⁹ Mar 15, 2009	-
Offshore	Community architecture ⁷⁰ (Condition)	Coregonids: Shortjaw Cisco -- found and verified in assessment gear	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: Every year	-	-
Offshore	Lake Trout/non-native salmonid balance ⁷¹ (Condition)	Chinook salmon sport catch (CPUE) ⁷²	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Lake Trout/non-native salmonid balance ⁷³ (Condition)	Chinook Salmon condition factors ⁷⁴	-	Poor: LT 0.7 (fish dying) Fair: 0.7-0.9 Good: 0.9-1.1 Very Good: GT 1.1	Fair Mar 15, 2009	-
Offshore	Lake Trout/non-native salmonid balance ⁷⁵ (Condition)	# of Chinook salmon as a ratio to # lake trout ⁷⁶	-	Poor: GT 75% Chinook Fair: 75-50% Chinook Good: 49-25% Chinook Very Good: LT 25%	-	-
Offshore	Native macroinvertebrates ⁷⁷ (Condition)	Diporeia -- Density of individuals in grab samples, 30-90 m depth ⁷⁸	-	Poor: LT 500/m² Fair: 500 - 1000/m² Good: 1000 - 4000/m² Very Good: GT 4000/m²	Poor Mar 15, 2009	-
Offshore	Native macroinvertebrates (Condition)	Diporeia -- Density of individuals in grab samples, >90 m depth	-	Poor: LT 500/m² Fair: 500 - 1000/m² Good: 1000 - 2000/m² Very Good: GT 2000/m²	Fair	-
Offshore	Native macroinvertebrates ⁷⁹ (Condition)	Mysis - Mean Density of individuals in vertical net tows at night (#/m²) at depths greater than 100m ⁸⁰	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Native macroinvertebrates ⁸¹ (Condition)	Non-native dressenids (total biomass) ⁸²	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Fair Mar 15, 2009	-
Offshore	Native macroinvertebrates ⁸³ (Condition)	Area of benthos inhabited by native macroinverts - proportion of grab samples from lakewide survey that have GT 700/m² Diporeia ⁸⁴	-	Poor: LT 40% of sites Fair: 40-60% of sites Good: 60-80% of sites Very Good: GT 80% in lakewide survey	Fair Mar 15, 2009	-
Offshore	Population size & dynamics (condition) ⁸⁵ (Condition)	Proportion of wild Lake Trout in sample. ⁸⁶	-	Poor: LT 10% Fair: 10-20% Good: 20-50% Very Good: GT 50%	Poor Mar 15, 2009	-
Offshore	Population size & dynamics (condition) ⁸⁷ (Condition)	lake trout: Spawning stock biomass/recruit ⁸⁸	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Predator growth/Food availability ⁸⁹ (Condition)	lake trout: Growth based on asymptotic length ⁹⁰	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: GT 900mm	-	-
Offshore	Species composition / dominance (Condition)	Phytoplankton species composition ⁹¹	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Water quality (Landscape Context)	Water clarity ⁹²	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Good Mar 15, 2009	-
Offshore	Water quality (Landscape Context)	P :N :Si nutrient amounts ⁹³	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Water quality (Landscape Context)	Oxygen concentration ⁹⁴	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Water quality (Landscape Context)	Contaminant load in fish tissue - appropriate for egg incubation ⁹⁵	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Water quality (Landscape Context)	Nutrient ratios for algae	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Water quality ⁹⁶ (Landscape Context)	Detrital rain ⁹⁷	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Population size & dynamics (size) ⁹⁸ (Size)	Coregonids: lake whitefish - numbers per/?? (Need to indicate measure -- Adults reported in Harvest?) ⁹⁹	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Population size & dynamics (size) (Size)	Coregonids: lake whitefish - Diverse Age Structure, based on healthy #'s of fish > age 5 ¹⁰⁰	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Population size of offshore prey fish species ¹⁰¹ (Size)	Coregonids: Bloater - #/density/ bottom trawls ¹⁰²	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Population size of offshore prey fish species (Size)	Deepwater sculpin: #/density/ bottom trawls ¹⁰³	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Population size of offshore prey fish species ¹⁰⁴ (Size)	Lake herring: total BIOMASS/ NUMBERS? Based on hydro-acoustic surveys ¹⁰⁵	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Population size of offshore prey fish species ¹⁰⁶ (Size)	Lake herring: total NUMBERS of Adult spawners/1000 ft survey net ¹⁰⁷	-	Poor: LT 10 Fair: 18568 Good: 51-100 Very Good: GT 100	Poor Mar 15, 2009	-
Offshore	Population size of offshore prey fish species ¹⁰⁸ (Size)	Nine-spine stickleback: total catch per 100 bottom trawls?? ¹⁰⁹	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Population size of offshore prey fish species ¹¹⁰ (Size)	Emerald shiner: total BIOMASS? in hydro-acoustic surveys ¹¹¹	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Population size of offshore prey fish species ¹¹² (Size)	Combined Native prey fish biomass (based on multiple, selected species - to be determined by USGS) ¹¹³	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Population structure & recruitment ¹¹⁴ (Size)	Coregonids: lake whitefish - Growth based on asymptotic length ¹¹⁵	-	Poor: - Fair: LT 700 mm Good: Approx. 700 mm Very Good: GT 700 mm	-	-
Offshore	Population structure & recruitment ¹¹⁶ (Size)	Coregonids: Menominee - multiple year classes appear in assessment gear ¹¹⁷	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: Every year	-	-
Offshore	Predator fish species population size ¹¹⁸ (Size)	Burbot: total numbers per 60 gill net lifts (1000ft nets) ¹¹⁹	-	Poor: LT 10 Fair: 40147 Good: 30-40 Very Good: GT 40	Fair Mar 15, 2009	-
Offshore	Predator fish species population size ¹²⁰ (Size)	Lake trout: Spawning stock biomass -- # individuals over age-7 relative to total native fish population ¹²¹	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Offshore	Predator fish species population size ¹²² (Size)	Lake trout: Young of the year density (#individuals/hectare) ¹²³	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	-	-
Native Migratory Fish	Access to Spawning Areas (Landscape Context)	Kilometers of Accessible Quality Habitat--North Channel	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Fair	-
Native Migratory Fish	Access to Spawning Areas (Landscape Context)	Kilometers of Accessible Quality Habitat--Georgian Bay	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Good ¹²⁴ Mar 15, 2009	-
Native Migratory Fish	Access to Spawning Areas (Landscape Context)	Kilometers of Accessible Quality Habitat--Main Basin	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Fair ¹²⁵ Mar 15, 2009	-
Native Migratory Fish	Access to Spawning Areas (Landscape Context)	Kilometers of Accessible Quality Habitat--Saginaw Bay	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Poor	-
Native Migratory Fish	Access to Spawning Areas (Landscape Context)	Kilometers of Accessible Quality Habitat--St. Marys River ¹²⁶	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Fair	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population size & dynamics (size) (Size)	Number of breeding adult sturgeon--North Channel ¹²⁷	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Fair ¹²⁸ Mar 15, 2009	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population size & dynamics (size) (Size)	Number of breeding adult sturgeon--Georgian Bay	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Poor ¹²⁹	- ¹³⁰
Native Migratory Fish	Population size & dynamics (size) (Size)	Number of breeding adult sturgeon--Main Basin	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Poor	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population size & dynamics (size) (Size)	Number of breeding adult sturgeon--Saginaw Bay	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Poor Mar 15, 2009	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population size & dynamics (size) (Size)	Number of breeding adult sturgeon--St. Marys River	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Poor	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population structure & recruitment (Size)	Abundance, natural reproduction of walleye--North Channel	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Fair	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population structure & recruitment (Size)	Abundance, natural reproduction of walleye--Georgian Bay	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Fair ¹³¹	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population structure & recruitment (Size)	Abundance, natural reproduction of walleye--Main Basin	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Fair	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population structure & recruitment (Size)	Abundance, natural reproduction of walleye--Saginaw Bay	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Good	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population structure & recruitment (Size)	Abundance, natural reproduction of walleye--St. Marys River	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Fair	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population structure & recruitment (Size)	Abundance and composition, suckers--North Channel	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Good	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population structure & recruitment (Size)	Abundance and composition, suckers--Georgian Bay	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Good	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population structure & recruitment (Size)	Abundance and composition, suckers--Main Channel	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Good	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population structure & recruitment (Size)	Abundance and composition, suckers--St. Marys River	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Good	-
Native Migratory Fish	Population structure & recruitment (Size)	Abundance and composition, suckers--Saginaw Bay	-	Poor: - Fair: - Good: - Very Good: -	Good	-

COMMENTS:

¹ This needs to be developed and made more quantitative; not currently being done but would be a very useful lakewide index. Need a monitoring plan to cover this indicator. Data may exist but would need to be compiled from multiple efforts. (most data are from outside the 10' contour--need to develop shallow water

² Edsall and Charlton, 1997 Edsall et al., 1995 Mills et al., 1993

³ need to develop an index incorporating parameters that are currently being monitored

⁴ Edsall and Charlton, 1997 Luckey, 2002 Mills et al., 2005

⁵ MacLeod et al., 1995 Minns, 1997 Minns et al., 1995 W.F. Baird and Associates, 1996

⁶ Lake sturgeon not reproducing on MI side, but are reproducing on ON side (one example)

⁷ MAY DELETE THIS INDICATOR when a better habitat index is developed. No obvious quantitative index, so rating based on expert knowledge. Status varies across lake. Impairments can be biological or physical in nature. Example of biological impairmenat includes round goby. Need to develop a quantitative approach to this indicator.

⁸ Fielder et al. (2008): "Creel surveys of the St. Marys River, however, suggest that bass fishing is a relatively small component of the fishery in those waters (Fielder et al. 2002)." "Surveys conducted in…Georgian Bay and the North Channel confirmed…relatively high abundance and longevity of smallmouth bass.

⁹ for wetlands, the location of the hardened shorelines relative to the wetlands is an important factor; hard to assess in great detail, and varies a great deal around the lake. can analyze remotely: EC and EPA, 2001; CJS Consulting, 2002 R. Davidson-Arnott, pers comm. For coastal terrestrial habitat target

¹⁰ this index relates to artificial shoreline of any type, primarily to prevent erosion and promote navigation. can analyze remotely: EC and EPA, 2001; CJS Consulting, 2002 R. Davidson-Arnott, pers comm. For coastal terrestrial habitat target

¹¹ road density is a good surrogate for degree of development; could also use number of marinas

¹² Road density, impervious cover, cottage density along shoreline. Pat Chow-Fraser is developing this index, as well as others, for Georgian Bay. Need to find existing studies and establish ratings based on those.

¹³ road density is a good surrogate for degree of development; could also use number of marinas

¹⁴ Road density, impervious cover, cottage density along shoreline. Pat Chow-Fraser is developing this index, as well as others, for Georgian Bay. Need to find existing studies and establish ratings based on those.

¹⁵ Refers to vegetation outside of coastal wetlands, and ratings may vary among nearshore areas. No comprehensive assessments being done. Edsall and Charlton, 1997; Jude and Pappas, 1992; no remote sensing done; requires field surveys. Ratings need to be tightened up.

¹⁶ lots of anthropogenic impacts have degraded this indicator, but little information to support this indicator

¹⁷ Need to incorporate length as well, but these ratings are the only ones in the literature

¹⁸ assess the number of structures per linear unit of shoreline; especially significant in high water years; large navigational structures (jetties 500-1000' into lake) are especially disruptive; aerial photography is sufficient to estimate this; indicator should account for number AND size

¹⁹ Some rivers are importing too much sediment, and some too little (due to dams). This index refers to elevated sediments. Need to develop an index of departure from reference sediment transport condition for rivers OR develop a complimentary index of reduced sediment load. Duke et al., 2006. Ouyang et al., 2005 Baird and Associates. 2005

²⁰ southern portion of basin has watersheds with highly elevated sediment loads, so Fair is an average of this index. need to look up references.

²¹ EPA, 1998 MOE, 1997 Edsall and Charlton. 1997

²² US Army Corps of Engineers. 2005; Fisheries & Oceans Canada. N.d. Farrell, J.M. 2001

²³ these indices were developed for wetlands south of the Canadian Sheild. Could use GLEI indices for birds and amphibians; need to update with Burton et al.2008 Crewe and Timmermans, 2005 Meixler, M, 2005 GLEI Collaboration, 2006

²⁴ photo interpretation, and comparison with predictions of Wilcox/Ingram model developed for IJC study

²⁵ Lougheed et al., 2001 Farrell, J.M. et al., 2003

²⁶ need to update with Burton et al.2008 Seilheimer and Chow-Fraser. 2006. Meixler et al., 2005 Brazner and Beals, 1997 Jude and Pappas,1992

²⁷ Toner et al., 2005 Farrell, et al., 2005.

²⁸ Pike and muskellunge use coastal wetlands heavily for spawning and are a great indicator of wetland viability

²⁹ McNair, S.A. and P. Chow-Fraser, 2003 Brinson, et al., 1981 Mills et al., 2003

³⁰ Lougheed and Chow-Fraser. 2002 Lougheed and Chow-Fraser, 1998

³¹ Confidence of these indicator rating descriptions: -

³² for wetlands, the location of the hardened shorelines relative to the wetlands is an important factor; hard to assess in great detail, and varies a great deal around the lake. can analyze remotely: EC and EPA, 2001; CJS Consulting, 2002 R. Davidson-Arnott, pers comm. For coastal terrestrial habitat target

³³ need to determine area of assessment--how far inland to include? must be sufficient to reveal true land use patterns in watersheds (not just coastal land use) need to determine intent of connectivity for this indicator--perhaps develop another indicator to address hydrologic function and elevation--need to account for regional differences can analyze; Dodd and Smith, 2003 Findlay and Lenton, 2001 Rubbo and Kiesecker, 2004 EC and CLOCA. 2004

³⁴ US Army Corps of Engineers. 2005; Fisheries & Oceans Canada. N.d; Sellinger 2008 documented long-term that cycle is trending downward towards lower water levels Trend is a decrease of roughly 5' between 1999-2002, with no rebound

³⁵ Trend is a decrease of roughly 5' between 1999-2002, with no rebound

³⁶ For Lake Huron, range of fluctuation needs to be increased (US ACOE website) Trend in Michigan/Huron is downward over 3+decades, both in levels and magnitude of fluctuation--need to refer to critical levels Committee to Review to Lake Ontario-St. Lawrence River Studies, 2006; Environment Canada and Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. 2004; Fisheries and Oceans Canada, no date.

³⁷ extreme range that has resulted from long term manipulation of water levels, climatic change, and isostatic rebound is a stress on wetlands

³⁸ need to adjust for Lake Huron--IJC Lake Levels Reference Study 1993. Difficult to generalize across the lake as effects of extended low levels may be negative or positive and interact with invasive species. pre- and post-seaway comparison in Farrell; Farrell, J.M. et al., 2003. Wilcox. D.A. 1993

³⁹ these ratings work for many fringing wetlands, but there are many other complexities involved. Barko et al., 1999 Farrell, J.M. et al., N.d. Hudon et al., 2005 Minc, L.D. and D.A. Albert, n.d.

⁴⁰ Pat's comparison was based on data lakewide. Need to obtain data to assign rating. Could also crosswalk these ratings to other projects, such as consortium (Don Uzarski) and GLEI (Jan Ciborowski) requires field surveys; Chow-Fraser, 2006 Chow-Fraser, pers. comm.

⁴¹ need to determine total area of current wetlands to set benchmark; some information on wetland loss, such as in Saginaw Bay, but other areas far less certain. Pat Chow-Fraser's work may allow an estimate within 2-3 years (contingent on continuing funding)

⁴² Native plant index should be incorporated and could include native plant cover (similar wording to how the ratings are now) also potentially a floristic quality, data being developed that could inform this in the future but not ready now

⁴³ Decided to take an average EO rank for all G1 - G3 element occurrences within 2 km of shoreline

⁴⁴ include range ranks that have an A or B rank as part of the range

⁴⁵ for wetlands, the location of the hardened shorelines relative to the wetlands is an important factor; hard to assess in great detail, and varies a great deal around the lake. can analyze remotely: EC and EPA, 2001; CJS Consulting, 2002 R. Davidson-Arnott, pers comm. For coastal terrestrial habitat target

⁴⁶ Confidence of these indicator rating descriptions: -

⁴⁷ US Army Corps of Engineers. 2005; Fisheries & Oceans Canada. N.d. Farrell, J.M. 2001

⁴⁸ Confidence of these indicator rating descriptions: -

⁴⁹ Confidence of these indicator rating descriptions: -

⁵⁰ Robbins et al 1989; Tate 1998; EOMF 2006

⁵¹ some research has documented that human activities, such as walking with pets along the shoreline, is a disturbance to migrating shorebirds and waterfowl

⁵² need to explore existing indicators

⁵³ Confidence of these indicator rating descriptions: -

⁵⁴ Confidence of these indicator rating descriptions: Medium

⁵⁵ if landscape is in poor or fair condition, need to implement strategy to identify priority isolated patches and enlarge and/or connect them to improved overall habitat

⁵⁶ Confidence of these indicator rating descriptions: Medium

⁵⁷ Percentage of undeveloped land - NOT percent of total - Need to get percent of total Confidence and reliability of these indicator rating descriptions: Medium

⁵⁸ Confidence of these indicator rating descriptions: Medium

⁵⁹ Based on building density indicators from Swedish Environmental Protection Agency 2006 (Environmental Quality Criteria for Coasts)

⁶⁰ Most indicators can be applied to coastal environments to provide greater resolution in viability (e.g. viability is higher in the north: e.g. average composite threat ranking is 1.3 for the North Channel and 3.3 for the Central and Southeast Coast of Lake Huron.

⁶¹ Based on Great Lakes islands project (Kraus, Henson and Ewert 2009)

⁶² Jackson 2006

⁶³ Requires field surveys. Canada Yew and White Cedar are good indicators

⁶⁴ Sources: Wires pers comm. and Ewert et al 2004

⁶⁵ Use information from nesting surveys

⁶⁶ Wires pers comm.; Assisting in defining fair to good threshold

⁶⁷ Use information from nesting surveys Develop indicator for other species?

⁶⁸ Wires pers comm. Assisting in defining fair to good threshold

⁶⁹ Use information from nesting surveys Not including Double-crested Cormorants

⁷⁰ Keep or Discard? …is there enough data currently collected to generate an indicator? Instead of numbers/biomass, since menominee are less commonly caught, considering use of "year class" / "age class structure" indicator. QUESTION: is this maybe more of a NEARSHORE species indicator????

⁷¹ Measures healthy functioning pelagic system - health salmon fisheries mean forage fish are finding food (and food is not being trapped by non-native dressenids)

⁷² DNR Fisheries - creel harvest data (available annually)

⁷³ Measures healthy functioning pelagic system - health salmon fisheries mean forage fish are finding food (and food is not being trapped by non-native dressenids)

⁷⁴ DNR Fisheries

⁷⁵ QUESTION: Are ratings categories acceptable? Measure of ecosystem health, ability of system to provide food, habitat, etc. for multiple species, both pelagic and benthic. System would be doing well if producing large number of Lake Trout AND pelagic feeding Pacific salmonids

⁷⁶ DNR Fisheries - creel harvest data (available annually, low cost, and timely data) NOTE: Could also use CONSUME (consumption-based model), however model is expensive to run, takes time to run, and with changing system may be inaccurate

⁷⁷ Currently collected in Lake Huron Several lakewide surveys in the early 1970s; lakewide surveys by NOAA-GLERL 2000, 2003, and 2007. since 2001 by USGS GLSC (annual sampling, but at bottom-trawl stations only). Native Benthic macroinvertebrate; Diporeia highly variable, and in significant decline

⁷⁸ NOAA GLERL : Nalepa et al. 2007 (IAGLR 33(2) : ?) ; Nalepa, Fanslow, and Lang (in Press) ; and Nalepa pers. comms. USGS GLSC : French et al. (in press, 2008 or 2009) Mills et al 2003

⁷⁹ Data currently collected NOAA GLERL(contact : Steve Pothoven) has Mysis data for only a few years at transects off of Alpena and Harbor Beach. Should also contact Kelley Bowen at DFO (BowenK@DFO-MPO.GC.CA) - she may have data for Mysis over an extended time period. USGS GLSC (annual sampling, but at bottom-trawl stations since 2001). Native Pelagic macroinvertebrate; Mysis currently around 38/ m² and in decline

⁸⁰ NEED #'s from USGS paper in Press; NOTE: to get "Good" and "Very Good" ratings may need to do a ratio comparison and calculation based on Lake Ontario and Lake Michigan data (both which may have longer running data sets)

⁸¹ NOAA GLERL (Nalepa pers. comms.) recommends best indicator for dreissenids is total biomass. Since both size structure and condition can vary greatly over time and space, abundances are not as accurate. Biomass can also be compared to other food web components and to other lakes. (Alternative might be possibly to express terms of biomass/m²) ??

⁸² Nalepa pers. comms. Schaeffer pers. comms.

⁸³ A measure of distribution / frequency of occurrence.

⁸⁴ Nalepa pers. comms. Schaeffer pers. comms.

⁸⁵ Currently collected

⁸⁶ Data through GLFC Lake Huron Tech. Committee DNR Fisheries (Johnson); USFWS; OMNR (Reid, Mohr); CORA; others?

⁸⁷ Indicator of survival

⁸⁸ Data through GLFC Lake Huron Tech. Committee modeling process Lake Trout Stock Assessment Model data -- DNR Fisheries (Ji's work) and OMNR (Mohr)

⁸⁹ Currently available based on DNR Fisheries (Ji's) work Indicator measuring food availability for all sizes of lake trout

⁹⁰ Data through GLFC Lake Huron Tech. Committee modeling process DNR Fisheries (Johnson); OMNR (Reid, Mohr); CORA; others?

⁹¹ unsure about data source--is there a chlorophyll measure

⁹² In offshore, too clear may be negative, indicating lacking plankton; need to identify source

⁹³ need to identify source

⁹⁴ need to identify source

⁹⁵ Keep in for now; may delete later. Need to identify source

⁹⁶ Data collected by Environment Canada is extensive, covering 50 sites including both nearshore and offshore, Georgian Bay and Saginaw Bay (not sure if collected every year - suspect NOT); GL EPA collects basic phosphorous, nitrogen and others spring (April) and Summer/Fall (Aug.) but only hit 12-15 sites and sample offshore sites only

⁹⁷ EPA and/or Environment Canada (Not sure of best data source for developing indicator ratings) Mills et al 2003

⁹⁸ This data currently collected.

⁹⁹ DNR Fisheries (Johnson, and also Ji's work); OMNR (Reid, Mohr); CORA?? Age structure of younger fish: - OMNR nearshore - small mess gillnet assessments - USGS bottom trawl for DNR year class data from Thunder Bay trawl data

¹⁰⁰ DNR Fisheries (Johnson, and also Ji's work); OMNR (Reid, Mohr); CORA?? Age structure of younger fish: - OMNR nearshore - small mess gillnet assessments - USGS bottom trawl for DNR year class data from Thunder Bay trawl data

¹⁰¹ Keep in for now, may delete as an indicator later. May not be BEST indicator, given high variability in population from year to year.

¹⁰² USGS GLSC - Schaeffer, Roseman

¹⁰³ USGS GLSC bottom trawl data

¹⁰⁴ Currently collected. Also found in GLFC Lake Committee annual reports

¹⁰⁵ USGS GLSC hydro-acoustic sampling data

¹⁰⁶ Currently collected. Also found in GLFC Lake Committee annual reports

¹⁰⁷ DNR Fisheries Data (Johnson); Fall spawning assessment data - May need to average with OMNR data to get more Lakewide indicator

¹⁰⁸ Currently collected. Also documented in GLFC Lake Committee annual reports

¹⁰⁹ USGS GLSC bottom trawl data

¹¹⁰ Currently collected

¹¹¹ USGS GLSC hydro-acoustic sampling data

¹¹² Need to identify source of data; Not sure exact measure, but need to identify some indicator based on biomass (maybe of select set of species, or a ratio of species?)

¹¹³ USGS GLSC - Schaeffer, Roseman data

¹¹⁴ A measure of growth as an indicator of food availability, particularly important indicator for older year classes of lake whitefish. Growth as dropped for lake whitefish in Lake Huron

¹¹⁵ MDNR Lake Huron Fisheries Research Station (Jim Johnson pers. comms.) - data from Ji's work.

¹¹⁶ Keep or Discard? …is there enough data currently collected to generate an indicator? Instead of numbers/biomass, since menominee are less commonly caught, considering use of "year class" / "age class structure" indicator. QUESTION: is this maybe more of a NEARSHORE species indicator????

¹¹⁷ Need to identify data sources

¹¹⁸ Data through GLFC Lake Huron Tech. Committee modeling process DNR Fisheries (Johnson); OMNR (Reid, Mohr); CORA; others?

¹¹⁹ Currently collected, but would need to be combined through GLFC Lake Huron Tech. Committee modeling process; unusually high catch rates could indicate potential problems/concerns with lake trout (too few lake trout)

¹²⁰ Indicator of adult spawning capacity; stock size of fish big enough to spawn

¹²¹ Data through GLFC Lake Huron Tech. Committee modeling process Lake Trout Stock Assessment Model data -- DNR Fisheries (Ji's work) and OMNR (Mohr

¹²² Lake Trout YOY good indicator: (1) establishing self-sustaining lake trout a common goal for agencies; and (2) lake trout reproduction generally considered a good sign of ecosystem health (food quality, spawning habitat, well-managed fishing pressure, etc.).

¹²³ (#individuals/hectare) and growth; USGS GLSC; DNR Trawl survey in Thunder Bay; OMNR (Reid, Mohr); CORA??

¹²⁴ Environmental Objectives: 86% of major tributaries are no longer connected to the Lake Huron basin (Gebhardt et al. 2003) DEQ study of 800 tribs; Only 13 km of an estimated 250 km of mainstem river are currently accessible due to barriers on the watershed. The Thunder Bay River once supplied ample sturgeon spawning habitat in the form of 3-7 m per km gradient cataracts within 2 km of Lake Huron. Presently, 1 km of low gradient habitat is accessible due to a complex of hydroelectric dams. In the Saginaw Bay's watershed, 72% of river reaches are inaccessible to fish migrating from the bay (Fielder and Baker In Press). Substantial benefits from improved fish passage in the Saginaw River watershed have been identified with the selection of numerous candidate dams for removal or construction of fishways (Fielder and Baker In Press).

¹²⁵ The Nottawasaga River, a relatively large (3,330 km²) drainage basin with few barriers provides access to over 620 km of riverine habitat, of which 100 km is characterized as high quality spawning habitat and 400 km is classed as nursery habitat for a variety of fish species (Fred Dobbs, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, personal communication). Information on natural and artificial barriers to fish movement in watersheds draining into the Canadian waters of the Lake Huron basin is currently being compiled.

¹²⁶ (note rivers not dammed on US side, but habitat has been altered)

¹²⁷ For all - conference call on 3/23/09 with Dave Boregson, Dave Reid, Arunas Liskaukas, Dave Gondor, Owen Sound.

¹²⁸ See Lake sturgeon website (www.fws.gov/midwest/ sturgeon/index.htm) for links to current status and research, http://www.fws.gov/midwest/sturgeon/documents/2008-coord-mttg-basin-tables-figures.pdf; currently the number of spawning adults is only know for two of these populations, the rest are unknown; (34 historic populations, 20 are extant)

¹²⁹ New Lake sturgeon rehabilitation strategy draft to be available soon but not yet available (3/9/09 - comm. From Gary Whelan) Dave Fielder said that the overall status is very poor - a fraction of historic and he questions what is called extant

¹³⁰ The Nottawasaga River is an exception - there is evidence of substantial natural reproduction

¹³¹ In Georgian Bay, there is evidence of natural reproduction but low abundance. Within the Main Basin there is variability. To be healthy there would be more systems contributing fish to these mixed stock populations. Right now Saginaw Bay is the main component. In St. Marys - declines in spawner abundance in tributaries, Michigan not showing same trend -but fair reliance on stocking.

Objectives, Strategic Actions and Action Steps

Show all:
Strategic Action Measures
Action Steps Measures
Comments

Objective: By 20xx, reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by dams and barriers.

Strategic Action: Replace dams with low-head barrier with passage where appropriate
Strategic Action: Manage to mimic natural processes
Strategic Action: Prevent barriers
Strategic Action: Enhance fish passage

Objective: By 20xx, reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by housing and urban development and shoreline alteration

Objective: By 20xx, reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by invasive, non-native aquatic and terrestrial species

Strategic Action: Develop real world adaptive mgmt sites
Strategic Action: R&D - management options and tools
Strategic Action: Restore native populations of aquatic fish spp

Objective: By 20xx,reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by agricultural, forestry, and urban non-point runoff

Strategic Action: Conduct economic assessments of ecosystems services and educate public and gov't on monetary value of ecological goods and services
Strategic Action: Identify priority areas and promote targeted BMPs accordingly
Strategic Action: Improve field services/tech support

Strategy Effectiveness

Show all:
Comments
Objective Measures
Indicator Methods
Indicator Measures
Progress Reports

Percent Complete: 0%

Objective: By 20xx, reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by dams and barriers.

Percent Complete: 0%

Objective: By 20xx, reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by housing and urban development and shoreline alteration

Percent Complete: 0%

Objective: By 20xx, reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by invasive, non-native aquatic and terrestrial species

Percent Complete: 0%

Objective: By 20xx,reduce or eliminate the stresses caused by agricultural, forestry, and urban non-point runoff

All Monitoring Indicators

Show all:
Methods
Measurement Report
Progress Reports
Objectives
Target KEA Refs
Target Threat Refs
Other Refs

Indicator: # of Chinook salmon as a ratio to # lake trout
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Lake Trout/non-native salmonid balance

Indicator: Abundance and composition, suckers--Georgian Bay
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Abundance and composition, suckers--Main Channel
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Abundance and composition, suckers--North Channel
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Abundance and composition, suckers--Saginaw Bay
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Abundance and composition, suckers--St. Marys River
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Abundance and distribution of exotics
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Condition: Community architecture

Indicator: abundance of aquatic insects (biomass)
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: abundance of fruit-bearing plants
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Abundance of submersed aquatic vegetation
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: abundance of terrestrial insects
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Abundance, natural reproduction of walleye--Georgian Bay
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
				In Georgian Bay, there is evidence of natural reproduction but low abundance. Within the Main Basin there is variability. To be healthy there would be more systems contributing fish to these mixed stock populations. Right now Saginaw Bay is the main component. In St. Marys - declines in spawner abundance in tributaries, Michigan not showing same trend -but fair reliance on stocking.

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Abundance, natural reproduction of walleye--Main Basin
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Abundance, natural reproduction of walleye--North Channel
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Abundance, natural reproduction of walleye--Saginaw Bay
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Abundance, natural reproduction of walleye--St. Marys River
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Adjacent land use/percent natural cover
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Amount of habitat for migrating bats (need index)
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Amount of habitat for migrating bats--NLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: Amount of habitat for migrating bats--SLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: Amount of recreation and other activities on the shoreline and in water
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Amount of recreation and other activities on the shoreline and in water in northern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Landscape Context: Anthropogenic disturbance of habitat

Indicator: Amount of recreation and other activities on the shoreline and in water in southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Landscape Context: Anthropogenic disturbance of habitat

Indicator: Amphibian IBI
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Annual range and timing of lake level (seasonal fluctuations)
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
				extreme range that has resulted from long term manipulation of water levels, climatic change, and isostatic rebound is a stress on wetlands

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Water level fluctuations

Indicator: Annual range of lake level
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Comments
Target: Coastal Wetlands, Category: Landscape Context, KEA: Water level fluctuations
		Trend is a decrease of roughly 5' between 1999-2002, with no rebound
Target: Nearshore, Category: Landscape Context, KEA: Water level fluctuations
	Feb 15, 2009
Target: Coastal Terrestrial, Category: Landscape Context, KEA: Water level fluctuations
	Feb 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Landscape Context: Water level fluctuations
Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Water level fluctuations
Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Water level fluctuations

Indicator: Area of benthos inhabited by native macroinverts - proportion of grab samples from lakewide survey that have GT 700/m² Diporeia
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Native macroinvertebrates

Indicator: Area of wet meadow/meadow marsh
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Condition: Community architecture

Indicator: Artificial Shoreline Hardening Index--NLH
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Artificial Shoreline Hardening Index--northern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Condition: Soil / sediment stability & movement (condition)
Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use
Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use

Indicator: Artificial Shoreline Hardening Index--SLH
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Artificial Shoreline Hardening Index--southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Condition: Soil / sediment stability & movement (condition)
Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use
Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use

Indicator: Average composite threat ranking
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Islands
- Condition: Human influence

Indicator: Bed load traps and groins (number of structures per length of shoreline)
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Bed load traps and groins (number of structures per length of shoreline)--northern Lake Huron
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
Overall, good, but southern portions are likely "fair", some northern portions "very good"

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Condition: Soil / sediment stability & movement (condition)
Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Soil / sediment stability & movement (land context)

Indicator: Bed load traps and groins (number of structures per length of shoreline)--southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Condition: Soil / sediment stability & movement (condition)
Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Soil / sediment stability & movement (land context)

Indicator: Bed load traps and groins (number of structures per lineal length of shoreline)
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Bed load traps and groins (number of structures per shoreline unit)
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Biomass of algae
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Condition: Primary productivity

Indicator: Browse index
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009			Requires field surveys. Canada Yew and White Cedar are good indicators

Key Attribute

Islands
- Condition: Species composition / dominance

Indicator: Building density along coast (number of buildings/ha), 2 km from coast (emphasis on units within 100 m of coast)
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Building density within 100 m of coast (number of buildings/ha)--northern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Landscape Context: Landscape pattern (mosaic) & structure

Indicator: Building density within 100 m of coast (number of buildings/ha)--southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Landscape Context: Landscape pattern (mosaic) & structure

Indicator: Burbot: total numbers per 60 gill net lifts (1000ft nets)
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Predator fish species population size

Indicator: Chinook Salmon condition factors
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Lake Trout/non-native salmonid balance

Indicator: Chinook salmon sport catch (CPUE)
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Lake Trout/non-native salmonid balance

Indicator: Combined Native prey fish biomass (based on multiple, selected species - to be determined by USGS)
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population size of offshore prey fish species

Indicator: connectivity index
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Consistency of colonial waterbird use
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009			Use information from nesting surveys

Key Attribute

Islands
- Size: Population size & dynamics (size)

Indicator: Contaminant load in fish tissue - appropriate for egg incubation
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Landscape Context: Water quality

Indicator: Coregonids: lake whitefish - Diverse Age Structure, based on healthy #'s of fish > age 5
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population size & dynamics (size)

Indicator: Coregonids: lake whitefish - Growth based on asymptotic length
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Coregonids: lake whitefish - numbers per/?? (Need to indicate measure -- Adults reported in Harvest?)
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population size & dynamics (size)

Indicator: Coregonids: Shortjaw Cisco -- found and verified in assessment gear
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Community architecture

Indicator: Coregonids: Bloater - #/density/ bottom trawls
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population size of offshore prey fish species

Indicator: Coregonids: Menominee - multiple year classes appear in assessment gear
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population structure & recruitment

Indicator: Deepwater sculpin: #/density/ bottom trawls
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population size of offshore prey fish species

Indicator: Degree of development (% urban w/in 2 km)--northern Lake Huron
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
Overall, good, but southern portions are likely "fair", some northern portions "very good"

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use

Indicator: Degree of development (% urban w/in 2 km)--southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use

Indicator: Degree of development (road density w/in 2km of lake)
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Detrital rain
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Landscape Context: Water quality

Indicator: Diporeia -- Density of individuals in grab samples, 30-90 m depth
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Native macroinvertebrates

Indicator: Diporeia -- Density of individuals in grab samples, >90 m depth
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Native macroinvertebrates

Indicator: distance of land areas from roads
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: distance of land areas from roads--northern Lake Huron
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: distance of land areas from roads--southern Lake Huron
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Docking sites
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Islands
- Condition: Human influence

Indicator: Emerald shiner: total BIOMASS? in hydro-acoustic surveys
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population size of offshore prey fish species

Indicator: EO ranks of selected nested targets, northern Lake Huron
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Condition: Condition of nested targets

Indicator: EO ranks of selected nested targets, southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Condition: Condition of nested targets

Indicator: Erosion and deposition rates
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Erosion and deposition rates--northern Lake Huron
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Feb 15, 2009			southern portion of basin has watersheds with highly elevated sediment loads, so Fair is an average of this index. need to look up references.

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Soil / sediment stability & movement (land context)

Indicator: Erosion and deposition rates--southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Soil / sediment stability & movement (land context)

Indicator: Esocid index
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Condition: Presence / abundance of keystone species

Indicator: Extent and diversity of nonvegetation habitat
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Geomorphic settings
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Hexagenia densities in softshore mesotrophic waters
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Condition: Food web linkages

Indicator: Hydroperiod (period of time when wetland is covered with water)
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Water level fluctuations

Indicator: Invertebrate IBI
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Kilometers of Accessible Quality Habitat--Georgian Bay
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009			Environmental Objectives: 86% of major tributaries are no longer connected to the Lake Huron basin (Gebhardt et al. 2003) DEQ study of 800 tribs; Only 13 km of an estimated 250 km of mainstem river are currently accessible due to barriers on the watershed. The Thunder Bay River once supplied ample sturgeon spawning habitat in the form of 3-7 m per km gradient cataracts within 2 km of Lake Huron. Presently, 1 km of low gradient habitat is accessible due to a complex of hydroelectric dams. In the Saginaw Bay's watershed, 72% of river reaches are inaccessible to fish migrating from the bay (Fielder and Baker In Press). Substantial benefits from improved fish passage in the Saginaw River watershed have been identified with the selection of numerous candidate dams for removal or construction of fishways (Fielder and Baker In Press).

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Landscape Context: Access to Spawning Areas

Indicator: Kilometers of Accessible Quality Habitat--Main Basin
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009			The Nottawasaga River, a relatively large (3,330 km²) drainage basin with few barriers provides access to over 620 km of riverine habitat, of which 100 km is characterized as high quality spawning habitat and 400 km is classed as nursery habitat for a variety of fish species (Fred Dobbs, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority, personal communication). Information on natural and artificial barriers to fish movement in watersheds draining into the Canadian waters of the Lake Huron basin is currently being compiled.

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Landscape Context: Access to Spawning Areas

Indicator: Kilometers of Accessible Quality Habitat--North Channel
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Landscape Context: Access to Spawning Areas

Indicator: Kilometers of Accessible Quality Habitat--Saginaw Bay
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Landscape Context: Access to Spawning Areas

Indicator: Kilometers of Accessible Quality Habitat--St. Marys River
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Landscape Context: Access to Spawning Areas

Indicator: Lake herring: total BIOMASS/ NUMBERS? Based on hydro-acoustic surveys
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population size of offshore prey fish species

Indicator: Lake herring: total NUMBERS of Adult spawners/1000 ft survey net
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population size of offshore prey fish species

Indicator: Lake sturgeon status
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Condition: Community architecture

Indicator: lake trout: Growth based on asymptotic length
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Predator growth/Food availability

Indicator: lake trout: Growth based on asymptotic length
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Lake trout: Spawning stock biomass -- # individuals over age-7 relative to total native fish population
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Predator fish species population size

Indicator: lake trout: Spawning stock biomass/recruit
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Population size & dynamics (condition)

Indicator: Lake trout: Young of the year density (#individuals/hectare)
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Predator fish species population size

Indicator: Layers present
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Marsh Bird IBI
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Condition: Abundance and diversity of wetland-dependent bird species

Indicator: Mean patch size of landbird stopover habitat in southern Lake Huron (by unit of analysis)
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Mean patch size of landbird stopover habitat with priority score >2 in northern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Condition: Spawning habitat quality and accessibility

Indicator: Mean patch size of landbird stopover habitat with priority score >2 in southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Condition: Spawning habitat quality and accessibility

Indicator: Muskrat abundance
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Condition: Presence / abundance of keystone species

Indicator: Mysis - Mean Density of individuals in vertical net tows at night (#/m²) at depths greater than 100m
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Native macroinvertebrates

Indicator: Native fish species richness
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Condition: Community architecture

Indicator: Native plant index--northern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Condition: Community architecture

Indicator: Native plant index--southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Condition: Community architecture

Indicator: Native plant species richness
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Condition: Community architecture

Indicator: Native vegetation cover/SAV distribution in protected embayments and soft sediment areas
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Feb 15, 2009			lots of anthropogenic impacts have degraded this indicator, but little information to support this indicator

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Landscape pattern (mosaic) & structure

Indicator: Nearshore species spawning/ recruitment success
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Condition: Spawning habitat quality and accessibility

Indicator: Nearshore/in lake spawning and nursery fish habitat quality
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Nine-spine stickleback: total catch per 100 bottom trawls??
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Size: Population size of offshore prey fish species

Indicator: Non-native dressenids (total biomass)
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Native macroinvertebrates

Indicator: Number of breeding adult sturgeon--Georgian Bay
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
				New Lake sturgeon rehabilitation strategy draft to be available soon but not yet available (3/9/09 - comm. From Gary Whelan) Dave Fielder said that the overall status is very poor - a fraction of historic and he questions what is called extant

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population size & dynamics (size)

Indicator: Number of breeding adult sturgeon--Main Basin
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population size & dynamics (size)

Indicator: Number of breeding adult sturgeon--North Channel
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009			See Lake sturgeon website (www.fws.gov/midwest/ sturgeon/index.htm) for links to current status and research, http://www.fws.gov/midwest/sturgeon/documents/2008-coord-mttg-basin-tables-figures.pdf; currently the number of spawning adults is only know for two of these populations, the rest are unknown; (34 historic populations, 20 are extant)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population size & dynamics (size)

Indicator: Number of breeding adult sturgeon--Saginaw Bay
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population size & dynamics (size)

Indicator: Number of breeding adult sturgeon--St. Marys River
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Native Migratory Fish
- Size: Population size & dynamics (size)

Indicator: number of fall migrants
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: number of fall migrants--NLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Condition: Population

Indicator: number of fall migrants--SLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Condition: Population

Indicator: number of spring migrants
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: number of spring migrants--NLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Condition: Population

Indicator: number of spring migrants--SLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Condition: Population

Indicator: Numbers of colonial nesting waterbirds (Herring & Ring-billed Gulls)
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009			Use information from nesting surveys Develop indicator for other species?

Key Attribute

Islands
- Size: Population size & dynamics (size)

Indicator: Nutrient concentrations & dynamics
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Nutrient ratios for algae
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Landscape Context: Water quality

Indicator: Oxygen concentration
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Landscape Context: Water quality

Indicator: P :N :Si nutrient amounts
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Landscape Context: Water quality

Indicator: patch size in acres
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Percent natural land cover within 2 km of shoreline in northern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems
Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use

Indicator: Percent natural land cover within 2 km of shoreline in southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems
Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use

Indicator: Percent of Canopy/Sub-canopy in oak, hickory and elm, hackberry and willow
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Percent of understory/shrub layer in dogwood, viburnum, grapes
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for landbirds
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for landbirds--NLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for landbirds--SLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for shorebirds
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for shorebirds--NLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for shorebirds--SLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for waterfowl
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for waterfowl--NLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: percentage of 2 km shoreline area that scores >2 for waterfowl--SLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: percentage of 5 km shoreline area that scores >2 for landbirds
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of 5 km shoreline area that scores >2 for shorebirds
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of 5 km shoreline area that scores >2 for waterfowl
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of area 2-10 km from lake that is in natural land cover in northern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use

Indicator: percentage of area 2-10 km from lake that is in natural land cover in southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use

Indicator: percentage of area 2-5 km from lake that is in natural land cover
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of area 2-5 km from lake that is in natural land cover in northern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use
Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use

Indicator: percentage of area 2-5 km from lake that is in natural land cover in southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use
Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Coastal land use

Indicator: percentage of high priority (>8 total score) that is in conservation management
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of high priority habitat (>8 total score) that is in conservation management
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of high priority habitat (>9 total score) that is in conservation management
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of high priority habitat (>9 total score) that is in conservation management--NLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Management Status

Indicator: percentage of high priority habitat (>9 total score) that is in conservation management--SLH
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Management Status

Indicator: percentage of landscape within 5 km of shoreline that scores >2 for landbirds
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of landscape within 5 km of shoreline that scores >2 for shorebirds
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of landscape within 5 km of shoreline that scores >2 for waterfowl
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of northern Lake Huron basin that scores >2 for landbirds
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: percentage of score 4 habitat in conservation ownership/management
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of score 5 habitat in conservation ownership/management
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of southern Lake Huron basin that scores >2 for landbirds
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Aerial Migrants
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: percentage of southern Lake Huron basin that scores >2 for landbirds--NLH
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: percentage of southern Lake Huron basin that scores >2 for landbirds--SLH
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Phosphorous concentrations & dynamics
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Landscape Context: Water chemistry

Indicator: Phytoplankton species composition
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Species composition / dominance

Indicator: Population size: numbers of individuals in samples
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Productivity of colonial waterbird nests*
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009			Use information from nesting surveys Not including Double-crested Cormorants

Key Attribute

Islands
- Size: Population size & dynamics (size)

Indicator: Proportion of wild Lake Trout in sample.
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Condition: Population size & dynamics (condition)

Indicator: River spawning/migratory fish habitat quality
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
Some areas of good connectivity (ON), some fair (MI)	Feb 15, 2009			Lake sturgeon not reproducing on MI side, but are reproducing on ON side (one example)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Condition: Spawning habitat quality and accessibility

Indicator: road density (km road / km2) -eastern Georgian Bay
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: road density (km road / km2) -northern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Landscape Context: Connectivity among communities & ecosystems

Indicator: road density (km road / km2) -southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Terrestrial
- Landscape Context: Connectivity among communities & ecosystems

Indicator: Shoreline Hardening Index
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Spawning/ recruitment success for nearshore spawning offshore species
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Condition: Spawning habitat quality and accessibility

Indicator: total area in acres
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Total area of all wetlands
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Total area of all wetlands--northern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: Total area of all wetlands--southern Lake Huron
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Size: Size / extent of characteristic communities / ecosystems

Indicator: Vegetative composition (area of shrub, sedge meadow, emergent, SAV)
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Water level fluctuations

Indicator: Walleye population five-year average annual Yield
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Condition: Community architecture

Indicator: Walleye population index
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Water clarity
(measurement report) (target kea refs)

Measurement Report:

Measure	Date	Source	Trend	Comments
	Mar 15, 2009

Key Attribute

Offshore
- Landscape Context: Water quality

Indicator: Water Quality Index (WQI) for wetland quality
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Landscape Context: Water quality

Indicator: Wetland Fish Index (WFI) of wetland quality
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Condition: Fish Habitat Quality

Indicator: Wetland macrophyte index
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Condition: Species composition / dominance

Indicator: Wetland Zooplankton Index (WZI)
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Coastal Wetlands
- Condition: Trophic structure

Indicator: Yellow perch population five-year average annual Yield
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Condition: Community architecture

Indicator: Yellow Perch population index
(other refs)

Others:

Indicator: Zooplankton mean individual size and biomass
(target kea refs)

Key Attribute

Nearshore
- Condition: Food web linkages

This data is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

Lake Huron (ID: 1509)

Download Project

Associated Files

Associated Links