Cloudy Conditions? The State of the Cloud Lake and the Cloud River Watershed DRAFT March 29, 2015 Prepared for: Thunder Bay District Stewardship Council Prepared by: Dr. Robert F. Foster Northern Bioscience 363 Van Horne Street Thunder Bay ON P7A 3G3 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Abstract
Need to complete Northern Bioscience ii Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. iv List of Tables .................................................................................................................................... v List of Appendices ........................................................................................................................... vi 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 7 2 Zoning and Development ...................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Cloud Lake ................................................................................................................... 10 2.1.1 Recreation 1 Zone ................................................................................................... 10 2.1.2 Institutional ............................................................................................................. 11 2.1.3 Other ....................................................................................................................... 11 2.2 Cloud Bay and Cloud River Watershed. ...................................................................... 13 3 Cloud Lake ............................................................................................................................. 16 3.1 Physical Characteristics............................................................................................... 16 4 Fish Habitat ........................................................................................................................... 19 4.1.1 Walleye and White Sucker ...................................................................................... 19 4.1.2 Smallmouth Bass ..................................................................................................... 20 4.1.3 Other Species .......................................................................................................... 20 5 Water Quality ........................................................................................................................ 21 5.1 Cloud Lake ................................................................................................................... 21 5.1.1 1970s ....................................................................................................................... 22 5.1.2 1980s ....................................................................................................................... 24 5.1.3 1990s ....................................................................................................................... 25 5.1.4 2000s to Present ..................................................................................................... 27 5.1.5 Thermal Regime and Dissolved Oxygen .................................................................. 32 5.1.6 Phytoplankton ......................................................................................................... 34 5.2 Cloud Bay and Cloud River .......................................................................................... 35 6 Aquatic Community .............................................................................................................. 37 6.1 Cloud Lake ................................................................................................................... 37 6.1.1 Walleye.................................................................................................................... 42 6.1.2 Smallmouth Bass ..................................................................................................... 48 6.1.3 Other Species .......................................................................................................... 50 6.1.4 Macroinvertebrates ................................................................................................ 52 6.1.5 Community Dynamics ............................................................................................. 55 6.2 Cloud Bay and Cloud River .......................................................................................... 58 7 Issues ..................................................................................................................................... 60 7.1 Cloud Lake Eutrophication .......................................................................................... 60 7.2 Walleye Fishery ........................................................................................................... 61 7.3 Smallmouth Bass Fishery ............................................................................................ 62 7.4 Impacts of Rusty Crayfish on Fish Habitat .................................................................. 62 8 Data Gaps and Recommendations ........................................................................................ 63 8.1 Potential Data Gaps .................................................................................................... 63 Northern Bioscience iii Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 8.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 63 9 Glossary ................................................................................................................................. 64 10 Literature Cited ..................................................................................................................... 65 ListofFigures
Figure 1. Cloud Lake watershed in relation to Cloud River and Cloud Bay, Lake Superior. ........... 8 Figure 2. Cloud Lake and adjacent watershed (OMNRF imagery). ................................................. 9 Figure 3. Municipality of Neebing zoning for Pardee and Crooks townships near Cloud Lake. ... 12 Figure 4. Loyal Order of the Moose Lodge 844 campground on southeast shore of Cloud Lake (Cloud Lake Campers Association photos Facebook page). ................................................ 13 Figure 5. Municipality of Neebing Crooks Township Zoning By‐Law for Cloud Bay. OS=Open Space Zone; S1=Recreation 1 Zone. Cross‐hatch denotes Use Limitation (UL) zone. .................. 14 Figure 6. Municipality of Neebing Crooks Township Zoning By‐Law including Cloud River (Suttie 2014). ................................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 7. Bathymetry of Cloud Lake. ............................................................................................. 17 Figure 8. Map of Cloud Lake illustrating the results of a shoreline cruise completed July 5‐8, 1988 (Krishka 1988b). ................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 9. MOE (1980) Cloud Lake cottage pollution control survey results (57 full surveys and 9 partial surveys). ................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 10. Mean spring surface total phosphorous in relation to shoreline development through time on Cloud Lake. ............................................................................................................. 28 Figure 11. Water quality sampling in Cloud Lake, 1973‐2013. .................................................... 29 Figure 12. Representative depth‐temperature profiles in dicmictic lakes such as Cloud Lake in summer and winter. ............................................................................................................ 32 Figure 13. Water temperature (mean of 4 stations) and dissolved oxygen (DO) profiles from four stations on Cloud Lake on August 2, 1990 (Left) and dissolved oxygen (DO) profiles from Station 3 on Cloud Lake on three dates in 1973 (right) (adapted from Pugh 1992). .......... 33 Figure 14. Thematic diagram of annual cycle of thermal stratification in dimictic lakes like Cloud Lake. ..................................................................................................................................... 34 Figure 15. Total Phosphorus (TP) levels in Cloud Bay watershed during August 2001 survey (Chow‐
Fraser and Wilson 2002). ..................................................................................................... 35 Figure 16. Catch per Unit Effort (CUE) for gill‐netting and trap‐netting at Cloud Lake, 1964‐1999 (OMNR unpublished data). See .......................................................................................... 39 Figure 17. Location of fish sampling at Cloud Lake, 1964‐1999. .................................................. 41 Figure 18. Length frequency distribution of sampled walleye from Cloud Lake from 1988 (Kriska et al. 1988b, left) and the 1999 (MacIntosh and Scholten 2004). ........................................... 44 Figure 19. Age frequency distribution of sampled walleye from Cloud Lake from 1988 (Kriska et al. 1988b, left) and the 1999 (MacIntosh and Scholten 2004). ............................................... 44 Northern Bioscience iv Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 20. Young‐of‐the‐year walleye from Cloud Lake netted along the west shore by the main road on July 16, 2007 (OMNR photo). ................................................................................. 48 Figure 21. Length‐frequency distribution of smallmouth bass sampled in 1964, 1988, and 1999 from Cloud Lake (TL=total length; FL=fork length). ............................................................. 50 Figure 22. Rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus). Note diagnostic black bands on tips of claws, rusty patches on each side of the carapace, and large size. ........................................................ 54 Figure 23. Location of 2011 (north side of lake) and 2012 rusty crayfish trapping effort by OMNR (modified from Friday and Wojick 2013). Labels #1, #4, and #5 refer to three 1990 benthic macro‐invertebrate sampling stations (Pugh 1992). .......................................................... 55 Figure 24. Examples of relatively natural shoreline (left) and property with lawn to near water's edge. .................................................................................................................................... 60 ListofTables
Table 1. Cloud Lake Physical Characteristics (OMNR Aquatic Habitat Inventory database 1976) 16 Table 2. Total Phosphorous, chlorophyll a and Secchi Disk depth boundary values for determining a lake's trophic state (Vollenwider and Kerekes 1982). ......................................................... 21 Table 3. OMOE Lake Level Classification (Pugh 1992). ................................................................ 24 Table 4. Summary of Cloud Lake water quality parameters by Pugh (1992). ............................. 27 Table 5. Summary of available water quality parameters for Cloud Lake. See Figure 7 for sampling locations. ............................................................................................................................. 30 Table 6. Summary of mean water quality variables for Cloud Bay collected in August 2001 (Chow‐
Fraser and Wilson 2002). ..................................................................................................... 36 Table 7. Fish species documented in Cloud Lake. ......................................................................... 37 Table 8. Catch summary for gill and trap netting on Cloud Lake 1964‐1999 (OMNR unpublished data). .................................................................................................................................... 38 Table 9. Biological data for walleye sampled from Cloud Lake (Krishka 1988a,b; MacIntosh and Sholten 2004). ...................................................................................................................... 44 Table 10. Biological data for smallmouth sampled from Cloud Lake (derived from OMNR data).49 Table 11. Biological data for other fish species sampled from Cloud Lake (derived from OMNR data). .................................................................................................................................... 51 Table 12. Results of seine‐netting at Cloud Lake in 1976 and 1988. See Figure 17 for location of seine‐netting. ....................................................................................................................... 51 Table 13. Summary of 1990 benthic invertebrate sampling in Cloud Lake (Pugh 1992). ............ 54 Table 14. Fish species documented in Cloud Bay (OMNR AHI 1976; Hartviksen and Momot 1988; Chow‐fraser and Wilson 2002; Foster pers. obs.). .............................................................. 58 Northern Bioscience v Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions ListofAppendices
Appendix 1. Cloud Lake Shoreline Imagery Photo‐Series (OMNR Imagery). ............................... 73 Appendix 2. Cloud River (OMNR Imagery). .................................................................................. 78 Appendix 3. Coordinates of past water sampling stations in Cloud Lake. ................................... 80 Appendix 4. Location of LRCA water sampling stations in the Cloud River Watershed, 2014. ... 82 Appendix 5. Summary of 2014 LRCA water sampling in the Cloud River watershed. ................ 83 Appendix 6. Results of 1990‐91 microbiological of water samples from Cloud Lake (Pugh 1992).87 Appendix 7. Results of 1990‐91 phytoplankton sampling by MOE (Pugh 1992). ........................ 88 Appendix 8. Results of Benthic invertebrates 1990‐1991 sampling for benthic invertebrates in Cloud Lake (Pugh 2992). See Figure 23 for sampling locations. ......................................... 91 Northern Bioscience vi Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 1 Introduction
Cloud Lake is located approximately 30 km south of Thunder Bay, Ontario and is linked to Lake Superior by Cloud River (Figure 1). and summarized here. The Cloud River watershed encompasses approximately 80 km2 within the Municipality of Neebing including the townships of Crooks, Blake, Pearson and Pardee. Cloud Lake is a headwater lake, with its 1919 ha representing approximately 1/4 of the greater Cloud River watershed. The Cloud River runs 21.7 km from Cloud Lake to Cloud Bay. The gradient is steep in the upper reaches (within the first 1.6 km) then the river valley gradually widens in its flatter lower reaches. The general slope of the watershed is 0.74 percent (Suttie 2014). The surficial geology of the Cloud River watershed is mainly glaciolacustrine plains from the Rove Formation (Suttie 2014). Other landform features not associated with glacial activity that are present in the watershed include: bedrock, organic accumulation, esker, kame, outwash plains and moraines. The most abundant soil type in the Cloud River watershed is clay loam, which covers 21.5 km2 (Suttie 2014). Moderately coarse sandy loam, organic and peaty phase soils cover 3.9 km2 of the watershed, with rock, silt loam and silty clay loam covering 50.5 km2. The Cloud River watershed is located in the transition between Great Lakes‐St. Lawrence and the boreal forest regions (Rowe 1972). This is reflected in the species composition of the overstory trees, with typical boreal species as jack pine, black spruce, white spruce, white birch and trembling aspen, but also pockets of sugar maple, red pine, and white pine. Large‐toothed aspen, a primarily eastern species, is also present along the north shore of Cloud Lake. According to Andy Anderson (pers. comm. to R.J. Winkworth 1980, OMNR files), the south, east and north shore of Cloud lake were subject to intense logging (white pine, red pine, white spruce, black ash, cedar) in the 1940s. Operations were run by Hurting and Sons, then owner‐
operators of a hotel situated along the international border near the old Pigeon River crossing. Sawlogs and pulpwood were sluiced down the Cloud River until the 1940s, rafted and towed or shipped to mills (http://www.lakesuperior.com/blogs/superior‐notes/304jrnl/). According to Anderson, once logged out, the whole area was burned over due to a fire started from improper maintenance of slash pile burning. Evidence remains to date in the form of burned 5' diameter white pine stumps on back shore. In the late 1950, a road was built along the north shore and cottage lots planned. Harvesting of trembling aspen in the Cloud Lake watershed began in the 1980s when it became commercially valuable and have continues sporadically into the 2000s (Foster pers. obs.). Northern Bioscience 7 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 1. Cloud Lake watershed in relation to Cloud River and Cloud Bay, Lake Superior.
Northern Bioscience 8 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 2. Cloud Lake and adjacent watershed (OMNRF imagery). Northern Bioscience 9 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 2 ZoningandDevelopment
The majority of the Cloud River watershed is privately owned land (91%) and the remainder is provincially owned Crown Land (Suttie 2014). The Cloud River watershed falls entirely within the Municipality of Neebing. The Official Plan (OP) for the Municipality of Neebing (Lynde, Paul Associates Inc. 2008) was approved January 2008 by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH). The MMAH received a total of 15 appeals regarding the decision to approve the Township of Neebing Official Plan. With the exception of Cloud Bay (see section 2.2 Cloud Bay), the majority of the appellants settled or withdrew their appeals prior to the appeal hearing through pre‐
hearing and Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) mediation processes. The entire Cloud River watershed is also within the Lakehead Region Conservation Authority (LRCA) area of jurisdiction. LRAC administers the Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses O. Reg 180/06 under the Conservation Authorities Act for regulated areas, which includes the following:  Provincially Significant Wetlands and adjacent lands (within 120 m),  all watercourses,  all land zoned Hazard Land or Use Limitation, steep slopes and 15 metres landward, and  1 km lakeward from the 100 year flood level on Lake Superior (i.e. 184.0 metres Geodetic Survey of Canada). A very small portion of the Cloud Bay provincially significant wetland (PSW) is located in the Cloud River watershed near the confluence with Lake Superior (Harris and Foster 200). The Pearson Township PSW (Harris and Foster 1997) is located just northwest of Cloud Lake, but drains into the Pine River. 2.1 CloudLake
2.1.1 Recreation1Zone
In the Municipality of Neebing's new Official Plan, most of the cottage development on Cloud Lake is zoned as S1 ‐ Recreation 1 Zone (Figure 3). However, no new year round or recreational residential lots are permitted on or within 300 m of Cloud Lake (p. 30, OP) due to observed decreases in quality on Cloud Lake (see 5 Water Quality). This designation was appealed by G. Huber (Environmental Registry 2015), but denied during the OP planning process. S1 zoning allows only seasonal occupancy, however, the Township of Neebing is aware that some properties in S1 zones are indeed occupied on a year‐round basis (R. Evans 2015 pers. comm.). Northern Bioscience 10 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions After water quality monitoring from 2003‐2005, the Ministry of Environment could no longer support any further development on Cloud Lake including the conversion of any seasonal dwellings to permanent home (Statlander 2006). The Provincial Policy Statement 2005 (MMAH 2015), on land use planning requires planning authorities such as the municipality to protect the quality and quantity of ground and surface water. Consequently, in reviewing any applications for planning approval on or near Cloud Lake, the municipality must ensure that the water quality of the lake will not be impacted. Development may only be permitted where sources of nutrients such as septic sewage systems are set back a minimum of 300 metres from the edge of the lake. Development inside 300 metres may only be permitted where appropriate studies have shown that the proposed development will not result in a net increase of phosphorous loading to the lake. 2.1.2 Institutional
A small property on the west shore of Cloud Lake in Pardee Township is zoned as Institutional (Figure 3). This property was formerly the site of a church, bible, or youth camp in the 1970s and 1980s. MOE (1980) noted the bible camp at the west end of Cloud Lake is used "only during the summer months and averaged 120 occupants at any one time, although as many as 200 people have been there using the facilities". It is believed the facility was sold in the 1990s and appears to be used as a private cottage, although it remains zoned as Institutional. 2.1.3 Other
There is a small boat launch and picnic are on the north side of Cloud Lake administered by the Municipality that is zoned as Open Space (Figure 3). The remainder of the Cloud Lake shoreline is zoned as Rural. Further development within this zone within 300 m of Cloud Lake is not permitted under the OP. There is an existing cottage on the west side of Cloud Lake in this zone (red arrow in Figure 3). The Moose Lodge 844 has a trailer park in the Rural Zone along the southeast shore of Cloud Lake. There are several main buildings as well as approximately 60 trailer spots (NEED TO CONFIRM) and outhouses (Figure 4). Users of the trailer park belong to the Cloud Lake Campers Association, which has an active Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Cloud‐Lake‐Campers‐Association/302785449745838) Northern Bioscience 11 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 3. Municipality of Neebing zoning for Pardee and Crooks townships near Cloud Lake. OS=Open Space; S1=Recreation 1; I=Institutional. Red arrow denote cottage in Rural Zone. Northern Bioscience 12 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 4. Loyal Order of the Moose Lodge 844 campground on southeast shore of Cloud Lake (Cloud Lake Campers Association photos Facebook page). 2.2 CloudBayandCloudRiverWatershed.
Most of the Cloud Bay shoreline where cottages are located is zoned as S1 Recreation Zone 1 with a couple of small parcels of Open Space Zone (Figure 6). The shoreline west of the Cloud River mouth is provincially significant wetland (PSW) that is restricted use zone (UL). This area has a somewhat contentious history. In the previous OP, this area was zoned as Rural, with approximately 60% being additionally subject to the overlay designation of "Area of Use Limitation". In 2000, Neebing Council proposed Amendment No. 10 to the Official Plan to permit the development of a fully‐serviced, 70‐unit seasonal trailer park proposed for Eagle Mountain Resort for the 61 ha property (Concession 6 PT E S/S Lot 2, Crooks Township). Approximately 1/3 of the lands were to be rezoned as Recreational with the balance redesignated as Environmental Protection. MMAH delayed in announcing a decision as to whether this amendment would be accepted, and this eventually led the proponent (1358872 Ontario Limited) to appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) in 2002. Concerned residents Northern Bioscience 13 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions formed the Shoreline Stewardship Association of Cloud Bay and Little Trout Bay, and Glen Dale also appealed to the OMB on their behalf. Expert witness testimony was provided, among others, by A. Harris and P. Chow‐Fraser (Chow‐Fraser and Wilson 2002). In August 2002, the OMB denied the appeal by the proponent and Dale regarding the delay, but allowed the appeal by Dale respecting Zoning By‐law 534‐2001 (http://www.elstons.ca/media/Case‐No.‐72.pdf). In essence, it ruled that commercial development adjacent to the Cloud Bay PSW posted too great an environmental risk for the development to be approved. During the preparation of the current Official Pan (OP) in 2007, Eagle Mountain Resort 1358872 Ontario Inc.) objected to the Official Plan (OP) designation of those lands as Environmental Protection (EP) Area (Environmental Registry 2015). The EP designation imposes constraints on the development potential of the land for most purposes, as was appealed by the developer to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). The OMB accepted expert evidence presented by the Municipality of Neebing and MMAH that the EP designation was defined and applied as per the requirements of the Provincial Policy Statement to ensure that the Cloud Bay PSW was protected. Accordingly, the OMB dismissed the Resort’s appeal and approved the Municipality of Neebing's OP (Environmental Registry 2015). Most of the Cloud River watershed is zoned R ‐ Rural Zone with a few blocks of C1 ‐ General Commercial Zone (Figure 3). Figure 5. Municipality of Neebing Crooks Township Zoning By‐Law for Cloud Bay. OS=Open Space Zone; S1=Recreation 1 Zone. Cross‐hatch denotes Use Limitation (UL) zone. Northern Bioscience 14 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 6. Municipality of Neebing Crooks Township Zoning By‐Law including Cloud River (Suttie 2014).
Northern Bioscience 15 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 3 CloudLake
3.1 PhysicalCharacteristics
Cloud Lake is a moderately sized lake with an area of 421 ha (Table 1). It is relatively deep, with littoral zone representing approximately 26% of the lake surface areas. Shallow areas are concentrated on the east and northwest end of the lake and in the bay at the outlet (Figure 7). Most of the shoreline is steep and rocky particularly along the south shore and near the point mid‐way along the north shore, with sandy areas in the large bay at the east end of the lake and to a lesser extent in the small bay at the northwest end of the lake. Table 1. Cloud Lake Physical Characteristics (OMNR Aquatic Habitat Inventory database 1976) Parameter Value Area (ha) 420.9 A6‐ Area deeper than 2 m (ha) 310.5 Shoreline Length (km) 10 1
% Littoral Zone 26 Mean Depth (m) 9.0 Maximum Depth (m) 16.5 4 3
Volume (10 m ) 3806.4 Secchi (m) Morphoedaphic Index (MEI) Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) Growing Degree Days (GDD) 3.7 5.6 50.4 1500 1 based on 2 m depth Wetlands communities are generally poorly developed on Cloud Lake. The euphotic zone (area where photosynthesis can occur) extends to the limit of 1% incident light or approximately 10 m (based on 2.5 times the secchi depth)(Pugh 1992). Secchi disk depth was 4.1 m in 1991 (Pugh 1992) indicating approximately 60% of Cloud Lake is within the euphotic zone where submerged plants can potentially grow. There are beds of submergents near the public boat launch and in the bays on the south side of the lake. The current extent of submergents is not unknown however. The presence of bulrush at (Seine #3) is noted on OMNR's 1976 Lake Survey map and at several locations in Kriskka's (1988b) shoreline mapping, notably the northeast corner of Cloud Lake as well as the two bays on the south side (Figure 8). Submergents are also noted near the boat launch. There are five small tributaries that flow into Cloud Lake (Figure 7). They are generally less than 1 m wide and 10‐30 cm deep depending on seasonal flows and rain events (Foster pers. obs.). There was Northern Bioscience 16 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions approximately 2‐3 ft/sec flow in the streams on the west and east shores of Cloud Lake in June 1976 (OMNR Lake Survey). Figure 7. Bathymetry of Cloud Lake. Northern Bioscience 17 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 8. Map of Cloud Lake illustrating the results of a shoreline cruise completed July 5‐8, 1988 (Krishka 1988b). Northern Bioscience 18 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 4 FishHabitat
4.1.1 WalleyeandWhiteSucker
Typical, preferred spawning habitat for walleye is clean, well‐oxygenated cobble substrate in well‐oxygenated areas of rivers (e.g., riffles and rapids) or wave‐swept rocky shoals or shorelines and lakes (Scott and Crossman 1998; Colby XX). Walleye have been reported spawning across a range of depths, but most typically in shallow water between 0.5 and 1.0 m depth (Barton and Berry 2011; Kerr et al. 1994; McMahon et al. 1984). The 1976 OMNR lake survey mentioned potential spawning at the head of Cloud River (OMNR 1976), but often beaver dam at outlet was noted as a possible barrier. However, use of the Cloud River for spawning walleye was not confirmed. In the summer of 1977, a small inflowing tributary along the east shore of Cloud Lake was diverted by a cottage owner. Unconfirmed, anecdotal reports indicate that this was a small but significant walleye spawning habitat. The OMNR was made aware of diversion but no record exist that documents action taken (if any). Since diversion there is severe yearly erosion as well as downstream and even shoreline siltation (OMNR unpublished records). OMNR conducted a shoreline cruise of Cloud Lake on July 5‐8, 1988 to identify potential walleye spawning habitat, recording substrate type, vegetation and slope were recorded to depths of 2‐3 m where visible (Kriskhka 1988b)(Figure 8). Several offshore shoals along the southwest shoreline of the Cloud Lake were further investigated by snorkelling to determine their extent and composition. Walleye spawning habitat appeared to be present along much of the Cloud Lake shoreline (Krishka 1988b). During spring captures of spawning walleye in 2001, there appeared to be large amounts of potentially suitable cobble spawning habitat (M. Deschamps pers. comm.). White sucker spawn in similar habitats as walleye but typically 1‐2 weeks later than walleye in northwestern Ontario. White suckers tend to prefer slightly higher flows than walleye in some systems (Corbett, and Powles. 1986), but eggs will often end up in the same locations (e.g., Foster and Harris 2010; Foster et al. 2014 ). White sucker have been observed spawning over gravel and cobble washed from roadsides at culverts (A. Harris pers. obs.), so may potentially have spawned in the tributary that was redirected at the east end of Cloud Lake. Rainbow smelt spawned in the small tributary along the northwest shore of Cloud Lake and typically congregated below the perched culvert along the main road (Foster pers. obs.), and may run Northern Bioscience 19 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions farther upstream now that the culvert has been replaced with a larger, properly bedded culvert. It is not known if white suckers have traditionally spawned in this stream. 4.1.2 SmallmouthBass
Unlike walleye and white suckers which are broadcast spawners, male smallmouth bass construct nests in shallow water where spawning occurs and the fry remain for the first several weeks of life (Scott and Crossman 1973; Ridgway 1988). Smallmouth bass typically nest on sandy, gravel, or rocky bottoms of lakes and rivers, usually near the protection of rocks, logs or more rarely, dense vegetation (Scott and Crossman 1998). In a recent study on Lerome and Plateau lakes in northwestern Ontario (Foster and Harris 2010), the vast majority of the 306 smallmouth bass nests observed were on rock/cobble, boulder, or bedrock shorelines, indicating a preference over soft mineral or organic shorelines. On average, there was one nest approximately every 65 m of shoreline, but as in other studies (e.g., Scott 1996; Rejwan et al. 1997), nests were patchily distributed reflecting availability of preferred substrate. Smallmouth bass nests were typically 20 to 40 cm in diameter and up to 10 cm deep. Nests were found in 0.3 cm to 2.0 cm of water, with mean depths in Plateau Lake (0.6 m) approximately half that of those in Lerome Lake (1.3 m), presumably due to the darker waters of Plateau Lake that limit light penetration (Foster and Harris 2010). Nests were typically 3‐4 m from shore, although some were up to 20 m from shore in shallow‐sloping bays. 4.1.3 OtherSpecies
Northern pike spawn in the early spring over submerged vegetation or flooded emergent vegetation from the previous year, often in less than 18 cm of water (McCarragher and Thomas 1972; Scott and Crossman 1998). Northern pike likely spawn in the small pockets of shoreline marsh and meadow marsh in the small bay on the south side of Cloud Lake or along the shoreline of the bay near the outlet at Cloud River. Northern Bioscience 20 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 5 WaterQuality
5.1 CloudLake
Freshwater lakes are commonly classified based on their trophic status based on their nutrients levels, as reflected by phosphorous levels, chlorophyll a, and secchi disk readings. Nutrient‐
poor lakes are considered oligotrophic (or even ultra‐oligotrophic if exceptionally nutrient poor. Nutrient rich lakes are called eutrophic, with mesotrophic lakes in between. Based on the parameters in Table 2, Cloud Lake is considered mesotrophic. Particulate matter and nutrients from inflows gradually accumulate in lakes over time in a process of natural eutrophication which occurs over centuries or millennia. This process can be accelerated by cultural eutrophication as a result of human activities such as through land use practices in a lake's watershed or by the direct discharge of sewage, or other effluents containing nutrients. Nitrogen and particularly phosphorous are most often limiting Eutrophic lakes area characterized by a high biomass of plants, especially algae, and in many instances, low levels of dissolved oxygen. which can result in the build up of toxic products such as methane, hydrogen sulphide and ammonia. Eutrophic conditions can lead to fish kills and species shifts of both plants and animals, such as toxic algae blooms. Table 2. Total Phosphorous, chlorophyll a and Secchi Disk depth boundary values for determining a lake's trophic state (Vollenwider and Kerekes 1982). Although freshwater algae require a number of nutrients in order to grow, the two that are Northern Bioscience 21 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions most commonly present in limiting amounts are phosphorus and nitrogen. Of these, phosphorus is the nutrient that most often limits the growth of aquatic plants in freshwater systems and, when present in high concentrations, is most often responsible for lake eutrophication. Phosphorus concentrations are therefore regularly used for lake monitoring programs. Chlorophyll a concentration (an index of the amount of algae contained within the water column of the lake) and secchi disk depth (a measure of the lake’s water clarity), are other parameters that are also correlated with phosphorous levels and often used for water quality monitoring in lakes. However, in Ontario, secchi depth is often controlled by dissolved organic carbon (DOC) (OMOE 1998); "stained" water which is darkened by organic compounds (e.g., tannins) makes it more difficult to correlate secchi depth with nutrient status. Chlorophyll a measurements are costly and must be pooled in large numbers to yield meaningful ice‐free means. As a result, In Ontario, spring Total Phosphorus (TP) is the recommended parameter to monitor long term changes in tropic lake status since it is relatively inexpensive, reliable, and interpretable. Water quality sampling has been periodically conducted by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (OMOECC, formerly OMOE). More recently, volunteer sampling through the OMOE Lake Partner Program have also conducted water sampling and secchi disk measurements. Sampling stations are shown in Figure 11 and water quality data for Cloud Lake are summarized in Table 5. Coordinates for sampling stations are provided in Appendix 3. Water samples for TP for the Lake Partner Program are take once during May a week or so after ice out so that the lake is completely mixed. Samples are taken at a deep, offshore spot in the Lake, at a depth of approximately 1 m (from the surface to the secchi depth). Ideally, additional secchi depth reading are to be taken twice a month from May through October. 5.1.1 1970s
The MOE classifies lakes into four categories or levels (
Northern Bioscience 22 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions ). Cloud Lake has historically been managed as a Level 2 lake, with good water quality. Water quality sampling was conducted by MOE in 1979, and modelling (Dillon and Righer 1975) by MOE indicated that natural supplies of phosphorous were much greater than anthropogenic sources on Cloud Lake (Maki 1979). Maki (1979) recommended that "steps should be taken to control artificial sources of phosphorous although this does not necessarily limit new development". Northern Bioscience 23 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 3. OMOE Lake Level Classification (Pugh 1992). Parameter Mean Chlorophyll a (μg/L) Mean Secchi Disk Depth (m) Springtime Total Phosphorous (μg/L) Water Quality Suitability for Water‐based Recreation Level 1
0‐2
>5
0‐9.9
excellent
suitable
Level 2
2‐5
2‐5
9.9‐18.5
good
suitable
Level 3 5‐10 1‐2 18.5‐29.9 fair reduced suitability Level 4
10‐25
<1
29.9‐56.3
poor
unsuitable
5.1.2 1980s
In 1980, MOE conducted a Cottage Pollution Control Program on Cloud and a couple of other high use cottage lakes in Thunder Bay District (OMOE 1980). It involved the inspection of all sewage disposal systems used by individual cottage owners and the determination of the bacteriological quality of the lake waters and of the drinking water supplies serving the cottages. For each cottage lot, the owner was interviewed and a sketch was made including all sewage disposal systems and their distances to any water sources. Limited oil borings were also conducted on some properties to determine the quantity and quality of soil. Water samples for chemical and bacteriological analyses were taken at various points along the shoreline. No problems were found with the sewage disposal systems at the Bible Camp. At the time, the Loyal Order of the Moose camp had not been used for two years. Seven pit privies were found there, all requiring attention due to poor construction and location (apparently now rectified, see Figure 4). In 1980, there was only one permanent resident on the lake at the northeast corner near where the Cloud Lake Road first approached the lake. Of the 57 completed surveys, disposal systems were found to be satisfactory for 27 cottages. A total of 29 abatement orders were issued, one for a seriously substandard Class 2 system that deposited septic wastes on to a rocky area near the cottage. The majority of problems required the construction of leaching pits for sauna and kitchen wastes, and vermin‐proofing of privies. Nine cottage‐owners were not interviewed, but the sewage disposal systems were assessed and no serious problems detected. Five of the 13 water samples were adverse for bateria, including one adverse sample from lake water (as opposed to well or spring water). Northern Bioscience 24 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 9
Class 1 ‐ satisfactory 27
Class 2 ‐ seriously substandard
Class 3 ‐ substandard
15
Class 4 ‐ direct polluter
Class 5 ‐ unknown
15
1
Figure 9. MOE (1980) Cloud Lake cottage pollution control survey results (57 full surveys and 9 partial surveys). In 1985, MOE's modelling indicated that "the number of permissible cottage units which Cloud Lake could support without changing from Level 2 to Level 3 water quality is in excess of 500" (Vander Wall 21985). The 1985 memo also stated that if "all of the existing lots are converted to permanent dwelling rather than maintained recreational units, the water quality will reach the upper limit of Level 2. This would suggest that although the creation of permanent dwelling on all existing lots in Cloud Lake is permissible from water quality stand point, the creation of new lots beyond those in existence will result in over‐development and concomitant water quality degradation". Future monitoring of lake levels proved this level of development to be widely optimistic. 5.1.3 1990s
Water quality monitoring was conducted in 1990‐1991 by OMOE in response to cottager's concerns that algae densities in the lake had increased over a 20‐year period owing to nutrient inputs from cottage developments (Pugh 1992). According to Pugh (1992) the water quality of Cloud Lake remained good, and that cottage developments did not appear to be impairing water quality. Springtime total phosphorous remained similar, and although mean chlorophyll a concentrations had doubled, mean secchi disk depth had increased as well ( Northern Bioscience 25 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 4). The increase in Secchi disk depth was attributed by Pugh (1992) to a shift in from shallow water to deepwater species composition for phytoplankton, which can occur naturally from time to time. The changes in chlorophyll a levels was thought to be due to changes in laboratory analytical methods or who the depth of the euphotic zone is estimated. There was an indication that the deeper waters suffers from dissolved oxygen depletion during the mid to late summer, but that oxygen replenishment occurs during the tall lake turnover. Northern Bioscience 26 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 4. Summary of Cloud Lake water quality parameters by Pugh (1992). Water quality sample for microbiological analysis were also collected at 1 m depth by MOE in 1990‐1991 at four mid‐lake stations and 11 shoreline locations near cottages. Raw data are presented in Appendix 6. Total coliform and fecal coliform levels on all three sampling occasion were found to be well under MOE criteria for body contact recreation. 5.1.4 2000stoPresent
Although Cloud Lake is considered mesotrophic, phosphorous levels in the lakes have increased recently (Figure 10, Table 5). Sampling done by MOE in 2003‐2005 indicated mean levels of spring phosphorous concentration of 25.2 mg/m3 (μg/L), which pushes Cloud Lake into the level 3 category. The Provincial Water Quality (PWQ) Objective is 20 μg/L . As a result, the MOE does not support any further development on Cloud Lake including the conversion of any seasonal dwellings to permanent home (Statlander 2006).
Northern Bioscience 27 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 140
40.0
Youth Camp
Trailer Park Campsites
35.0
Total Permanent Residences
120
Mean Spring Surface Total Phosphorus
30.0
# dwellings/cottages
100
25.0
80
20.0
60
15.0
40
10.0
20
Mean Spring Surface Total Phosphorus (ug/l)
Cottages
5.0
0.0
2014
2012
2010
2008
2006
2004
2002
2000
1998
1996
1994
1992
1990
1988
1986
1984
1982
1980
1978
1976
1974
1972
1970
0
Year
Figure 10. Mean spring surface total phosphorous in relation to shoreline development through time on Cloud Lake. Northern Bioscience 28 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 11. Water quality sampling in Cloud Lake, 1973‐2013. Northern Bioscience 29 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 5. Summary of available water quality parameters for Cloud Lake. See Figure 7 for sampling locations. Source Maki 1980 Maki 1980 Maki 1980 Maki 1980 OMNR Lake Survey Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Pugh 1992 Lake Partner Database Lake Partner Database Lake Partner Database Lake Partner Database Lake Partner Database Lake Partner Database Lake Partner Database Northern Bioscience Date 1973‐06‐12 1973‐08‐15 1973‐07‐12 1973‐10‐25 1976‐06‐29 1990‐07‐05 1990‐07‐05 1990‐07‐05 1990‐07‐05 1990‐08‐02 1990‐08‐02 1990‐08‐02 1990‐08‐02 1991‐05‐30 1991‐05‐30 1991‐05‐30 1991‐05‐30 2003‐05‐14 2003‐05‐14 2004‐05‐19 2004‐05‐19 2005‐05‐05 2005‐05‐05 2008‐06‐20 Surface TP Sample Depth (m)
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
TP1 (µg/L) TP2 (µg/L) 24.0
26.7
28.3
26.5
21.2
21.3
15.1
27.8
26.3
25.2
31.8
21.8
21.9
32.7
Mean Surface TP (µg/L) Mean Deep TP (µg/L) Deep TP Sample Depth (m) Mean Secchi Depth (m) 13.0
18.0
20.0
24.0
10.0
13.0
13.0
16.0
11.0
11.0
11.0
15.0
25.9
26.5
26.7
29.2
21.5
21.6
23.9
20.0
42.0
30.0
20.0
13.0
14.0
13.0
12.0
13.0
18.0
141.0
76.0
22.0
16.0
21.0
16.0
12.2
12.2
14.0
9.8
6.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
8.0
10.0
15.0
12.0
7.0
7.0
10.0
10.0
2.5
1.8
2.3
2.5
3.7
3.0
3.3
4.3
4.3
2.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.5
3.0
5.2
5.0
1.3
Composite Chorophyll Sample a (ug/l) Depth (m) 4.80
3.60
4.50
7.50
8.75
10.60
10.60
6.25
7.50
7.50
7.50
7.00
7.00
12.50
10.00
0.5
5.3
2.7
2.1
8.2
7.2
7.5
7.5
3.7
4.2
5.1
5.1
5.9
6.1
6.3
5.5
30 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Source Lake Partner Database Lake Partner Database J. Kantor 1989 Maki 1980 Maki 1980 Maki 1980 Maki 1980 Northern Bioscience Date 2013‐05‐13 2013‐05‐31 1973‐05‐20 1973‐06‐27 1973‐07‐30 1973‐08‐20 Surface TP Sample Depth (m)
1.0
1.0
TP1 (µg/L) TP2 (µg/L) 32.0
40.4
32.4
39.4
Mean Surface TP (µg/L) Mean Deep TP (µg/L) Deep TP Sample Depth (m) Mean Secchi Depth (m) 32.2
39.9
???
2.8
2.5
2.8
1.8
Composite Chorophyll Sample a (ug/l) Depth (m) 5.40
4.80
5.40
3.60
2.1
4.1
3.1
7.4
31 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 5.1.5 ThermalRegimeandDissolvedOxygen
Given its morphology and the climate of northwestern Ontario, Cloud Lake is deep and large enough that it thermally stratifies. It is a dimictic lake with a pattern of spring and fall turnover. During the winter, the Cloud Lake is isothermic, and is generally the same water temperature throughout the water column (Figure 12). Figure 12. Representative depth‐temperature profiles in dicmictic lakes such as Cloud Lake in summer and winter. During the summer, there upper layer of water (epilimnion) warms in the upper 6 or 7 m (Figure 13). A thermocline with a rapid change in temperature forms in late summer at a depth of about 7 m (Pugh 1992). Below this is the colder, denser hypolimnion. Only the upper, lighter waters of the epilimnion are mixed by wave action during the summer. Throughout the summer, particulate matter and nutrients that fall through the epilimnion into the hypolimnion and may settling on the lake bottom. Their decomposition by bacteria result in lower dissolved oxygen levels in the hypolimnion. In August 1990 (Pugh 1992), oxygen levels in the hypolimnion were <3 ppm, which is below the level that most fish species can tolerate for any sustained length of time (Figure 13). Earlier in the summer, when water temperatures are colder, there were higher levels of oxygen in deeper water, but these decrease with time (Figure 13). Low levels of hypolimnetic DO alike persist each year through the summer until mid‐October when lake turnover occurs (Pugh 1992). Cold air temperatures in the fall cool the epilimnion more rapidly than deeper water. As upper layers become more dense, the lake turns over bringing oxygenated water to the bottom and nutrient‐rich deeper waters to the surface (Figure 14). As nutrient‐rich particles settle out Northern Bioscience 32 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions under the ice during winter and decompose, it can lead to anaerobic conditions at the bottom of dimictic lakes such as Cloud Lake. No winter DO measurements have been taken to date to determine if winter anoxia is present in the deeper waters of Cloud Lake although it was suggested by Pugh (1992). However, there is some concern for impairment of the lake's hypolimnetic dissolved oxygen during the winter, as is observed in late summer. Dissolved Oxygen (ppm)
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
Dissolved Oxygen (ppm)
0
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
0
2
2
4
8
10
12
14
DO Station #1
DO Station #2
DO Station #3
DO Station #4
6
8
10
12
14
Mean Temp
16
Approxiamte Water Depth (m)
Approxiamte Water Depth (m)
4
6
16
18
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
Water Temperature (C)
20.00
25.00
DO (May 30)
DO (Jun 27)
DO (Aug 30)
Figure 13. Water temperature (mean of 4 stations) and dissolved oxygen (DO) profiles from four stations on Cloud Lake on August 2, 1990 (Left) and dissolved oxygen (DO) profiles from Station 3 on Cloud Lake on three dates in 1973 (right) (adapted from Pugh 1992). Northern Bioscience 33 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 14. Thematic diagram of annual cycle of thermal stratification in dimictic lakes like Cloud Lake. 5.1.6 Phytoplankton
Pytoplacnkton samples were collected by MOE at four sites twice 1990 (July 5, August 2) and once again in 1991. See Appendix 7 for raw phytoplankton data. Dominance of species varied through time, but the taxa present reflected a "normal healthy community" with no indication of nutrient enrichment (Pugh 1992) Northern Bioscience 34 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 5.2 CloudBayandCloudRiver
Cloud Bay has excellent water quality with low nutrients levels and is a very high quality wetland, ranking in the top five of over 70 wetlands sampled around the Great Lakes from 1999‐2001 (Chow Fraser 2005; Chow‐Fraser and Wilson 2002). July TP levels were quite variable throught the Cloud River, ranging from 456 μg/L at the outlet of Cloud Lake to only 78 μg/L at the mouth of the Cloud River at Cloud Bay (Figure 15, Table 6). Water quality sampling in the Cloud River watershed was recently conducted by the LRCA . Sampling locations and a summary of results are presented in Appendix 3 and Appendix 4. Figure 15. Total Phosphorus (TP) levels in Cloud Bay watershed during August 2001 survey (Chow‐Fraser and Wilson 2002). Northern Bioscience 35 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 6. Summary of mean water quality variables for Cloud Bay collected in August 2001 (Chow‐Fraser and Wilson 2002). Northern Bioscience 36 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 6 AquaticCommunity
6.1 CloudLake
A total of 13 species of fish has been reported from Cloud Lake (Table 7). Four species (walleye, rock bass, smallmouth bass, rainbow smelt) have been introduced, deliberately or unintentionally. Several other species have been observed in tributary streams of Cloud Lake and their associated beaver ponds, including northern redbelly dace (Phoxinus eos), central mudminnow (Umbra limi), and brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans)(Foster pers. obs.). Table 7. Fish species documented in Cloud Lake. Family Common Name Salmonidae Osmeridae Esocidae Umbridae Catostomidae Cyprinidadae Cisco (Lake Herring) Rainbow Smelt Northern Pike Central Mudminnow White Sucker Finescale Dace Cyprinidadae Blacknose Shiner Centrarchidae Rock Bass Centrarchidae Smallmouth Bass Percidae Yellow Perch Percidae Walleye Percidae Iowa Darter Cottidae Sculpin Scientific Name MNR Code Status in Cloud Lake Coregonus artedii
Osmerus mordax
Esox lucius
Umbra limi
Catostomus commersoni
Chrosomus neogaeus Notropus heterolepus Ambloplites rupestris
Micropterus dolomieu
Perca flavescens
Sander vitreus vitreus
Etheostoma exile Cottus sp.
093
121
131
141
163
183 200 311
316
331
334
338 382
native introduced native native native native native Source AHI 1976
AHI 1976
AHI 1977
AHI 1978
AHI 1979
OMNR 1976
introduced introduced native introduced native OMNR 1976
AHI 1975
AHI 1976
AHI 1976
AHI 1976
OMNR 1976
native FWIN 1998
The original fish community in Cloud Lake appears to have been dominated by northern pike, cisco, and rainbow smelt. Smallmouth bass and rock bass were present in Cloud Lake in 1964 (OMNR unpublished data), and were likely introduced. Rock bass were accidently introduced into many lakes in the Thunder Bay region when they were stocked with young smallmouth bass from southern Ontario sources (Hartviksen and Momot 1989). Both species were abundant during the 1964 lake survey. Rainbow smelt were apparently introduced into Cloud Lake in the late 1970s (Krishka 1988b). "Northern hognosed sucker" (Hypentelium nigricans) is erroneously reported as occurring in Cloud Lake by Pugh (1992); however, Thunder Bay is well outside its reported range in Ontario (Holm et al. 2009). Northern Bioscience 37 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 8. Catch summary for gill and trap netting on Cloud Lake 1964‐1999 (OMNR unpublished data). June 23‐26, 4 sets of 1.8 m (8') trap net with 5 mm 1964 (2") mesh Aug 10‐14, 1987 May 24‐27, 1988 10 sets of 1.8 m (8') trap net with 5 mm (2") mesh 6 sets of 1.8 m (8') trap net with 5 mm (2") mesh 1 set of 1.2 m trap net with 5 mm (2") July 7, 2008 mesh Total
White Sucker Rock Bass Smallmouth Bass Yellow Perch Walleye TOTAL 22 125
14 1 16 194 Northern Pike Date Effort (all sets overnight) June 23‐26, 4 gill net sets each 700' () long with 25‐ 16 1964 114 mm (0.5‐4.5") mesh 1 set of lake survey gill net set, 152 m June 29, 53 (500') long with 38‐127 mm (1.5‐5") 1976 mesh 2 sets of lake survey gill net each 152 Aug 10‐12, m (500') long with 38‐127 mm (1.5‐5") 1987 mesh 5 sets of FWIN gill nets each 60.8 m Sept 9, (200') long with 25‐152 mm (1‐6") 1999 mesh Rainbow Smelt Cisco 5 2 60 0 2 1 3 15 5 26 1 10 64 58 40 94 267 30 21 70 17 138 10 66 134 128 7 19 364 58 414 186
55 66*
779 11 95 69
1
3 81 130 636 550 273 78 186
1923
* 3 recaptures Northern Bioscience 38 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 70.0
CUE (# fish/net‐set)
60.0
Cisco
50.0
Northern Pike
White Sucker
40.0
Rock Bass
Smallmouth Bass
30.0
Yellow Perch
20.0
Walleye
TOTAL
10.0
0.0
Gill 1964
Gill 1976
Gill 1987
Gill 1999
140.0
CUE (# fish/net‐set)
120.0
Cisco
100.0
Northern Pike
White Sucker
80.0
Rock Bass
Smallmouth Bass
60.0
Yellow Perch
40.0
Walleye
TOTAL
20.0
0.0
Trap 1964
Trap 1987
Trap 1988
Trap 1988 (4')
Figure 16. Catch per Unit Effort (CUE) for gill‐netting and trap‐netting at Cloud Lake, 1964‐1999 (OMNR unpublished data). See Northern Bioscience 39 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 8 for details of netting and raw catch values. Northern Bioscience 40 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 17. Location of fish sampling at Cloud Lake, 1964‐1999. Northern Bioscience 41 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 6.1.1 Walleye
6.1.1.1 1960s
At request of Cloud Lake Campers Association, 143 walleye from Pigeon Bay (Lake Superior) were stocked into Cloud Lake in September 1964 (OMNR 1976 and unpublished records). All transfers were adults, up to 4 lbs. In weight. Only two adult walleye were caught during netting for the 1976 lake survey, but several "pickerel minnows" were observed during seining at the east end of the lake indicating that there had been some natural reproduction in the interim (OMNR 1976). 6.1.1.2 1970s
Anecdotal reports indicated that walleye (and smallmouth bass) fishing increased dramatically in the late 1970s (OMNR unpublished record) and that walleye angling was excellent in spring of 1979 as 18 fish were caught in one day weighing a total of 59.5 lbs. (average of 3.5 lb/fish)(OMNR unpublished records). Subsequent to anger success in 1978‐1979, fishing pressure on Cloud Lake has seen a 4‐fold increase (OMNR unpublished record); it is not known what this estimate was based on since no creel surveys were undertaken. Circa 1982, at least several walleye in the 7‐13 lb size class were angled near the public boat launch (Foster pers. obs.). 6.1.1.3 1980s
Concern over the vulnerability of large Cloud Lake walleye to angler harvest, and potential effects on recruitment led to assessment efforts for "trophy walleye by OMNR in 1987‐1988 (Krishka 1988a,b). Gill and trap nets were used in August 1987 and trap nets in May 1988 to assess the walleye population (
Northern Bioscience 42 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 8). Walleye were generally large, with no fish smaller than 50 mm FL (Table 9, Figure 18). The youngest of 25 walleye caught in 1987 was nine years of age i.e., spawning in 1978 year‐
class, suggesting limited recruitment (Table 9, Figure 19). Trap‐netting in 1988 also showed an age‐distribution heavily skewed to older fish. Krishka (1988a) reported that discussions with cottagers and anglers suggest that very few if any juvenile walleye have been angled recently although larger walleye are occasionally caught. One angler indicated catching his limit of walleye [6 at the time] recently with fish ranging in size from 0.5‐2 kg. No young‐of‐the‐year (YOY walleye) were caught during evening (20:50 to 22:05) beach seines in July 1988 (Table 12).. As a result of the 19887‐88 studies, a limit of 6 fish of which only one could be over 50 cm total length (TL) was implemented (MacIntosh and Scholten 2004). Northern Bioscience 43 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 9. Biological data for walleye sampled from Cloud Lake (Krishka 1988a,b; MacIntosh and Sholten 2004). Year Fork Length (mm) Net Type n Mean Range 1987 both 25 1988 trap 63 1999 gill 94 609 640 540 Weight (g) n Mean
Range Total Length (mm)
n Mean Range 531‐750 25
501‐750 63
457‐670 94
641
673
569
659‐792 25
530‐878 63
485‐697 94
Age
n Mean Range 2250‐5550 16 2150‐6700 63 1520‐4494 94 3388
4030
2525
13.0
15.0
8.1
9‐16
15‐19
8‐12
50
Average Size = 569 mm
45
40
Frequency (%)
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
140
180
220
260
300
340
380
420
460
500
540
580
620
660
700
740
Total Length Size Bin (mm)
Figure 18. Length frequency distribution of sampled walleye from Cloud Lake from 1988 (Kriska et al. 1988b, left) and the 1999 (MacIntosh and Scholten 2004). 100
Annual Mortality = 24 %
90
Male Mortality = 24 %
Female Mortality unavailable
80
Frequency (%)
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Age (yrs)
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Figure 19. Age frequency distribution of sampled walleye from Cloud Lake from 1988 (Kriska et al. 1988b, left) and the 1999 (MacIntosh and Scholten 2004). Northern Bioscience 44 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions As proposed by Krishka (1987b), supplemental adult transfers of walleye from a shoal‐spawning stock (Lac des Milles Lacs) were conducted in 1989 and 1991 in an effort to improve recruitment (MacIntosh and Scholten 2004). It was hypothesized that the original 1964 introduction of river‐spawning fish from Pigeon Bay was not adapted to successfully spawn in a lake and that shoal spawning fish would perform better. 6.1.1.4 1990s
OMNR conducted Fall Walleye Index Netting (FWIN) in September 1999 to assess the status of the walleye population in response to the stocking. Results are presented in Northern Bioscience 45 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 8, Northern Bioscience 46 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 8, and Table 10, and like 19887‐88 sampling, there was a preponderance of large, older fish, with no fish smaller than 480 mm. All but 5 of the 94 walleye caught were 8 years of age, indicating a very strong 1991 year class. Apparently, one year class was produced immediately after the supplemental stocking, but none has been produced since. It is not known if the successful year class was a direct result of the supplemental stocking or if it was merely a coincidence (MacIntosh and Scholten 2004). Compared to other lakes in northwestern Ontario, there was a very high walleye CUE in 1999, and the mean size of 569 mm TL is significantly above the regional average (376 mmTL) (MacIntosh and Scholtens 2004). They were also about 60% heavier than the regional average as well. No index netting of adult walleye has been conducted since the 1999 FWIN. 6.1.1.5 2000stoPresent
In 2001 and 2002, cottage‐owner Al Germaine and a group of volunteers (with OMNR's help) dip‐netted adult walleye along the southern shore of Cloud Lake during the spring. Gametes were stripped and the fertilized eggs were incubated at the private walleye hatchery in Atikokan. Very small fry were stocked back into Cloud Lake later in each year. In 2003, eggs were collected for stocking Black Bay of Lake Superior, with a portion of the hatched fry returned to Cloud Lake. The success of these introductions is unknown; electro‐fishing assessment of the stocking in 2001 yielded no young‐of‐the‐year walleye. Fingerlings from Sault St. Marie, Michigan were obtained for stocking Black Bay in XXXX and additional fingerlings were stocked into Cloud Lake for 1 or 2 years. Reports of catches of young walleye in the 14‐
16" range were reported in XXX to XXX, but there were no reports of fish of that size‐class being caught in the last decade or so. At least 2 trap net sets were done XXX by OMNR and sampled fish were sent to the OMNR lab at Trent University (C. Wilson) to determine their provenence (i.e., natural, Atikokan stocking, SSM or natural). The DNA analysis indicated that only Cloud Lake strains were present (no MI). In late May circa 2005, two small walleye (approximately 0.5 kg) were angled on the west side of the lake by T. Cano (R. Foster pers. obs.) indicating either some natural recruitment or the survival of at least some of the stocked fingerlings. A YOY walleye seine‐ netted by OMNR (D. Viebeck, M. Deschamps, and J. George) on the west side of Cloud Lake in 1987 (Figure 20) indicating at least occasional spawning success. Northern Bioscience 47 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Figure 20. Young‐of‐the‐year walleye from Cloud Lake netted along the west shore by the main road on July 16, 2007 (OMNR photo). 6.1.2 SmallmouthBass
Available catch data for smallmouth bass from OMNR sampling programs is presented in Northern Bioscience 48 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 8 and . Size data for smallmouth bass is summarized in Table 10 and size‐frequency distributions are presented in Figure 21. Means size shows a slight decline over time but assessment methods were not entirely consistent among years. Ages are not available for most years, but smallmouth bass sampled during the 1999 FWIN had a mean age of 5.9 ±4.0 years with a range of 1‐16 years. Anecdotal reports from anglers indicate large smallmouth bass (3‐5 lbs) being commonly caught in the early 2000s (D. Viebeck pers comm.; Foster pers. Obs.). However, within the last 5‐7 years, the average size and condition of smallmouth bass angled in Cloud Lake appears to have declined, with fish in poor condition i.g., "skinny" reported (M. Deschamps, pers. comm.). There are some recent reports of a more recent improvement in size and weight of fish angled (D. Stoot pers. comm.). Table 10. Biological data for smallmouth sampled from Cloud Lake (derived from OMNR data). Year Net Type 1964 1987 1988 1988 1999 both both 8' trap 4' trap gill Fork Length (mm)
Total Length (mm)
Weight (g) n Mean Range
n Mean Range
n Mean Range 19 395 191‐521 19 1260
131 262 161‐401 18 319 180‐389 55 318 185‐412 18 680 180‐1200 11 255 168‐371 57 307 99‐489
Northern Bioscience 49 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Length-Frequency of Smallmouth Bass
14
12
10
# Fish
8
6
4
2
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
length (mm)
500
550
600
TL 1964
FL 1988
FL 1999
Figure 21. Length‐frequency distribution of smallmouth bass sampled in 1964, 1988, and 1999 from Cloud Lake (TL=total length; FL=fork length). 6.1.3 OtherSpecies
Cisco were abundant during the 1964 and 1976 lake surveys (
Northern Bioscience 50 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 8). Cisco were present in 3 of 4 gill nets set in 1964; they were not caught in Net #4 set in shallower water near the public boat launch. Although not individually sampled in 1964, the mean weight of the 16 cisco netted was only 40 g. A total of 53 cisco were caught in the single gill net set on the south side of the lake during the 1976 lake survey. The mean size of the ten cisco individually sampled was only 21.5 cm total length (range 21‐23 cm), and all 53 cisco were caught in the 1" mesh size. No cisco were caught during sampling in the 1987‐88 and 1999, although nets were set in 1‐14 m of water during the 1999 FWIN. Fish species other than walleye were not consistently sampled among years. Available biological data for these species are summarized in Table 11 and beach seining results are presented in Table 12. Table 11. Biological data for other fish species sampled from Cloud Lake (derived from OMNR data). Year Net Type Cisco 1964 gill 1976 gill Northern Pike 1964 both 1987 both 1988 trap 1999 gill White Sucker 1976 gill 1987 both 1988 trap Rock Bass 1976 trap 1987 both 1988 8' trap 1988 4' trap 1999 gill Yellow Perch 1964 both 1987 both 1999 gill Fork Length (mm)
n Mean Range
n
16
62
52
4
565
590
561
318‐953 58 1983 446‐955 11 1380 580‐2180 482‐671 4 1327 841‐2159 3
383
327‐440
10 213 10 11 10 527 438‐610
554 419‐658
451 139‐619
5 67 322 384 300‐340
224‐430
4 134 15 63 172 172 208 141 127‐210
123‐223
180‐244 201
81
92‐178
194
170
7 39 233 175 194‐275
118‐298
220
21‐23
Weight (g) Mean Range Total Length (mm)
n Mean Range
16
40
121‐265 15
96‐252
210 150‐350 165‐267 16
190 Table 12. Results of seine‐netting at Cloud Lake in 1976 and 1988. See Figure 17 for location of seine‐
netting. Northern Bioscience 51 Sculpin TOTAL Yellow Perch 66 Smallmouth Bass 84 Rock Bass 4 40 12 10 Walleye Total Net # 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 White Sucker Date June 29, 1976 July 23, 1976 July 23, 1976 July 23, 1976 July 23, 1976 July 6, 1988 July 6, 1988 July 6, 1988 July 6, 1988 July 6, 1988 July 6, 1988 July 6, 1988 July 6, 1988 July 6, 1988 July 6, 1988 July 6, 1988 July 8, 1988 July 8, 1988 Rainbow Smelt Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 4 4
24 1 17
13
2 16
13
300
200 21
1
1 100 20
1
12
8
1
1 1
3 3
1
4
1
8
24
18
13
18
13
300
225
0
0
1
122
5
60
14
10
4
4
32 315 357
0
5
839
64
6.1.4 Macroinvertebrates
Benthic macroinvertebrates were sampled at three locations (total of 15 grabs) in Cloud Lake in July‐August 1990 by MOE (Pugh 1992). Samples were taken with a standard petite ponar grab in depths of 1.5 to 13.5 m. See Figure 23 for location of sampling and Appendix 8 for raw benthic invertebrate data from 1990. The benthic invertebrate communities were relative diverse and indicated a healthy community ( Northern Bioscience 52 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 13)(Pugh 21992). Larvae of the burrowing mayfly Hexagenia (Ephemeroptera: Hexageneidae) were present at Station 4; this genus is typically associated with good water quality and is often a preferred prey of walleye. Northern Bioscience 53 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Table 13. Summary of 1990 benthic invertebrate sampling in Cloud Lake (Pugh 1992). Parameter Location Total # Samples Mean Water Depth (m) Water Depth Range (m) Substrates Total # Invertebrates Total # Taxa Density (#/m2) Station #1
east end
10
5 1.5 ‐ 13.5
sand in shallow water to clay in deeper water
554
28
1052
Station #4
Moose Camp Cove
5
5.5
1.5 ‐ 9.0
sand and gravel near shore to mud and organics in offshore 275
19
853
Station #5
Outlet
5
1.2
sand, silt, detritus with some gravel and clay
507
29
1929
Rusty crayfish are a relatively recent introduction to Cloud Lake. Rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus)(Figure 22) are native to the Ohio River basin and were first reported in Ontario waters in the 1960s, likely due to bait bucket introductions (Crocker and Barr 1968; OISAP 2015). Rusty were first reported in the Thunder Bay the late 1980s from Poundsford Lake (Momot et al. 1988) and then Lenore and a few other areas lakes (e.g., Lenore Lake)(Momot 1992). Their presence in Cloud Lake was first documented record in 2011, when a total of 20 rusty crayfish were found in 4 of 7 minnow traps set along the north shore of Cloud Lake by OMNR. Additional sampling (216 overnight trap‐sets) along the south shore of Cloud Lake in 2012 caught 22 crayfish at 36 sites (Figure 23). There was a mean catch of 0.1 rusty crayfish per trap, with only three of the native virile crayfish (O. virilis) caught. The abundance of rusty and virile crayfish in Cloud Lake is low compared to similar studies conducted on Whitefish Lake in 2007 (Berube and Kraft 2010) and 2012 (Friday and Wojick 2013) and Lake of the Woods (Rosenberg et al. 2010). Figure 22. Rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus). Note diagnostic black bands on tips of claws, rusty patches on each side of the carapace, and large size. Northern Bioscience 54 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions #1 #5 #4 Figure 23. Location of 2011 (north side of lake) and 2012 rusty crayfish trapping effort by OMNR (modified from Friday and Wojick 2013). Labels #1, #4, and #5 refer to three 1990 benthic macro‐
invertebrate sampling stations (Pugh 1992). 6.1.4.1 Parasites
Both rock bass and smallmouth bass in Cloud Lake often have black spot (Neascus spp., Uvulifer spp.). The larval flukes of this parasitic tapeworm appear as small round black spots found under skin or in flesh of fish. Smallmouth bass in Cloud Lake may also have yellow grub (Clinostomum marginatum); the cream‐coloured cysts containing larval flukes are of this parasitic tapeworm are found in the flesh. Fish‐eating birds (e.g. great blue herons, belted kingfisher) are the final host for these parasites, with freshwater snails severing as intermediate hosts as well. Although unsightly, consumption of fish with these parasites do not pose a threat to human health with typical food handling and cooking (Sea Grant 2015). A tapeworm (unknown species) was found in one of 10 cisco sampled during OMNR's 1976 lake survey. 6.1.5 CommunityDynamics
Interactions among fish species can be difficult to predict in temperate lakes, particularly when non‐native species are introduced. In the case of Cloud Lake, in addition to rainbow smelt, Northern Bioscience 55 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions rusty crayfish, and rock bass, the two most sought after sport fish species i.e., , walleye and smallmouth bass, were introduced as well. 6.1.5.1 RainbowSmelt
Rainbow smelt appeared in Cloud Lake during the 1970s (B. Hamilton , pers. comm in Krishka 1988a). Negative impact on walleye and yellow perch recruitment have been observed in lakes where smelt have been introduced (Regier et al. 1969; Mercado‐Silva et al. 2007). Rainbow smelt are known to alter the composition of pelagic zooplankton communities. Pelagic larval walleye initially feed on cyclopoid copepods, switching to slightly larger calanoid copepods and finally to large‐bodied Daphnia (Graham and Sprules 1992; Houde 1967). Recent work by McDonnell and Roth )(2014) suggests that larval walleye growth is slowed in systems that lack high densities of large‐bodied Daphnia (Cladocera); competition with rainbow smelt may represent a energetic bottleneck for walleye recruitment on Cloud Lake. Adult smelt may also prey directly on pelagic larval walleye when they are small, although empirical evidence in for this is hard to come by (McDonnell and Roth 2014). Predation or competition with rainbow smelt has been reported for ciscos (Hrabik et al. 1998; Rooney and Patteson 2009), and this may account for the lack of cisco observed in fisheries sampling in Cloud Lake since the 1970s. As walleye larvae reach approximately 40 mm TL, they switch from a pelagic lifestyle and move inshore to feed on benthic invertebrates once the reach. At this stage, they become vulnerable to predation from introduced smallmouth bass and rock bass. Johnson and Hale (1977) indicated that a large bass population might influence survival of walleye fingerlings. If walleye escape the gauntlet of predators while small (as in 1991), rainbow smelt likely provide an abundant food source for walleye once walleye attain sufficient size to feed on them. Of the sixteen walleye that were sacrificed during 1987 sampling by OMNR, all had very abundant visceral fat and three had rainbow smelt as stomach contents (the remaining were empty)(Krishka 1987a). A whole‐lake experiment was recently conducted for eight consecutive years on 64‐ha Sparkling Lake, WI in an attempt to eradicate smelt through intensive spring harvest of smelt combined with stocking and regulatory efforts to increase walleye (Gaeta et al. 2015). The lack of success demonstrates that removal of rainbow smelt from invaded lakes is difficult, and it should be assumed that they will remain a member of the Cloud Lake fish community. 6.1.5.2 RustyCrayfish
Rusty crayfish have been implicated in the decline of submergent vegetation (Lodge and Lorman 1985; Lodge et al. 1994; Wilson 2002). Although macrophytes are not preferred food, they may be destroyed or accidentally ingested during the search for preferred invertebrate Northern Bioscience 56 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions prey (Momot 1995), and it can be expected that macrophyte biomass will be reduced in newly invaded watersheds (Philips 2010). In addition to direct predation, the large‐scale removal of macrophytes by rusty crayfish may further contribute to the reduction of macroinvertebrates by facilitating predation (Phillips et al. 2009). Due to their large size and aggressive nature, they are better able to avoid being eaten by fish than native crayfish, increasing the likelihood that native species will decline. Smallmouth bass and yellow perch appear to avoid rusty crayfish with larger chelae than congeners (Roth and Kitchell 2005). Rusty crayfish are likely most vulnerable to predation by smallmouth bass and other fish when they are smaller juvenile or perhaps when they are soft‐bodied during moulting. 6.1.5.3 Cormorants
Double‐crested cormorant numbers on Lake Superior have been gradually increasing since their arrival in the early 1900s (Blokpoel and Tessier 1993). They were first observed breeding on Boundary Island East and West in 1999, with 72 and 147 breeding pairs respectively (Weseloh et al. 2002). Cormorants were not seen on Cloud Lake in the early 1970s and 1980s, but more have recently been observed in flocks of several dozen birds or more have been observed foraging on the lake. These birds likely commute from nesting islands on adjacent areas of Lake Superior, since there is no suitable breeding habitat (i.e., small, isolated islands) on Cloud Lake. Their impacts on the fish community in Cloud Lake are unknown. No cormorants were observed on one of the Boundary Islands in 2014 (B. Ratcliff pers. obs.) and cormorants may have abandoned the island due to human persecution (nests with eggs were observed). Northern Bioscience 57 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 6.2 CloudBayandCloudRiver
Approximately 90 species of fish have been documented from Lake Superior (Lawrie 1978; Minnesota Sea Grant 2012), of which 28 have been documented from Cloud Bay. Some of these species e.g., lake trout may forage in Cloud Bay but spawn and spend the majority of their lives in the colder, deeper, oligotrophic waters of Lake Superior outside the bay. Cloud Bay has a diverse fish community similar to Pine Bay (Chow‐Fraser and Wilson 2002) Only ten fish species have been documented for the Cloud River, although additional species are undoubtedly present since there has been relatively little fisheries assessment to date. Some species, such as rainbow trout are anadromous, running up the Cloud River to spawn but spending the majority of their lives in Lake Superior. White and longnose suckers, and likely walleye as well, spawn in the Cloud River. Rainbow trout, as well as walleye and white sucker, move from Lake Superior to spawn in Cloud River, but pass most of their life cycle in Cloud Bay or adjacent Lake Superior. During spawning runs, rainbow trout may move upstream at least as far as the culvert at Highway 61 depending on flows in a given year. Walleye and white sucker likely spawn in the rapids nearer the mouth of Cloud River. Other species such as smallmouth bass are resident in Cloud River or use the warmer waters near its mouth in Cloud Bay, but do not venture far into the colder, oligotrophic waters of Lake Superior. Table 14. Fish species documented in Cloud Bay (OMNR AHI 1976; Hartviksen and Momot 1988; Chow‐
fraser and Wilson 2002; Foster pers. obs.). Family Common Name Scientific Name Salmonidae Salmonidae Salmonidae Salmonidae Salmonidae Rainbow Trout Brook Trout Lake Trout Cisco (Lake Herring) Round Whitefish Rainbow Smelt Northern Pike Central Mudminnow Longnose Sucker White Sucker Finescale Dace Blackchin Shiner Blacknose Shiner Spottail Shiner Fathead minnow Oncorhynchus mykiss Salvelinus fontinalis Salvelinus namaycush Coregonus artedii Osmeridae Esocidae Umbridae Catostomidae Catostomidae Cyprinidadae Cyprinidadae Cyprinidadae Cyprinidadae Cyprinidadae Northern Bioscience Prosopium cylindraceum Osmerus mordax
Esox lucius
Umbra limi
(Catostomus catostomus
Catostomus commersoni
Chrosomus neogaeus Notropis heterodon
Notropus heterolepus
Notropis hudsonius Pimephales promelas MNR Code Cloud River Cloud Bay 76 80 81 093 102 121
131
141
162
163
183 199
200
201
209
X X X X X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X X 58 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Family Common Name Scientific Name Cyprinidadae Cyprinidadae Cyprinidadae Gasterosteidae asterosteidae asterosteidae asterosteidae Creek Chub Longnose Dace Pearl Dace Brook Stickleback Three‐spine Stickleback
Nine‐spine Stickleback Four‐spine Stickleback Trout perch Rock Bass Smallmouth Bass Yellow Perch Walleye Iowa Darter Logperch Mottled Sculpin Semotilus atromaculatus
Rhinichthys cataractae Percopsidae Centrarchidae Centrarchidae Percidae Percidae Percidae Percidae Cottidae Northern Bioscience Margariscus margarita
Culaea inconstans
Gasterosteus aculeatus Pungitius pungitius Alpetes quadricus Percopsis omiscomaycus
Ambloplites rupestris
Micropterus dolomieu
Perca flavescens
Sander vitreus vitreus
Etheostoma exile Percina caprodes
Cottus bairdi MNR Code Cloud River 212
211
214
281
282 283 284 291
311
316
331
334
338 342
382
X X X X X Cloud Bay X X X X X X X X X X X
X X 59 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 7 Issues
7.1 CloudLakeEutrophication
The most likely source of the elevated phosphorous levels observed recently in Cloud Lake is from anthropogenic sources. Anthropogenic sources potentially include aging septic fields, pit privies, and fertilizers from lawns (Figure 24). The 1976 OMNR lake survey noted "possible cottage sewage runoff" as a potential source of pollution. Cultural eutrophication of Cloud Lake and associated algal blooms has the potential to impair drinking water and therefore human health, as well as water‐based recreation and natural ecosystem processes. Figure 24. Examples of relatively natural shoreline (left) and property with lawn to near water's edge. No comprehensive survey of disposal systems on Cloud Lake has been done since 1980 when MOE conducted site visits (n=63)and interviews (n=57) of existing cottages and interviews of 37 cottage owner. Currently, MOE is only responsible for septic systems with an output of >10,000 l per day. The Thunder Bay District Health Unit (TBDHU), Environment Health Division now responsible for inspecting septic fields and tanks (Category 2,4,5). TBDHU does not have records for cottages on land leased from a cottage association (e.g., Cloud Lake Cottage Association) however. For septic field installation, typically two inspections are conducted by TBDHU, on pre‐installation of test pit to verify suitability and a second after inspection to ensure it meets Ontario building code. TBDHU may do an inspection upon request of landowner if it is failing, but there is no provincial or other requirement for inspection of older systems. TBDHU does not do unsolicited inspections of septic systems. Septic fields typically last 20 years, although older installations may function up to 30 or 35 years in some instances. The size of the field is dependent on the number of fixtures (e.g., Northern Bioscience 60 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions toilets, sinks, showers) and rooms in the cottage. Some cottages may not have a septic tank or field, but will rely on an outhouse and/or composting toilet. TBDHU has records back to 1980; prior to that could potentially be at the Lands Office or Neebing Township offices. These fields would be older than their engineered lifespan. The location of raw data from OMOE (1980) is unknown. No current information appear to be available on the number or location of pit privies on properties adjacent to Cloud Lake. Records search at the TBDHU cost $150 per property and may require the property owner's permission. Building permits may also provide some information on the location of septic fields, saunas, and other structures, but are currently not easily accessible at the Neebing office, although this may improve later in 2015 depending on staffing. Conducting a survey of property owners around Cloud with respect to disposal systems (septic, grey water, outhouses) and land use practices (e.g. lawn maintenance) similar to the one conducted in 1980 may have merit in helping to determine the cause of eutrophication in Cloud Lake and identify stewardship opportunities. 7.2 WalleyeFishery
There is limited recruitment in the walleye population of Cloud Lake and there has been speculation about the conditions that were responsible for the production of a good year class of walleye in 1991. MacIntosh and Sholten (2004) suggested several possibilities for the strong 1991 year class including:  a die‐back or major reduction in the smelt population due to disease, environmental conditions or depredation, which resulted in fewer depredations on walleye fry;  conditions for walleye reproduction could have been ideal and a year‐class was produced that was so large that the predators could not eliminate it; or  intra‐specific competition may be a factor of the recruitment failure (unlikely the strong year‐class was produced immediately following the stocking of adult walleye). MacIntosh and Sholten (2004) outlined several options for management of the walleye population: 1. Do not intervene, 2. Stock with young life stages of walleye, 3. Stock with adult walleye, 4. Stock with secondary predator species. The first option would allow the current suite of fish species to interact without intervention. Historically, year classes have been produced occasionally and the walleye population has remained viable. There is a risk that no year classes will be produced before the current adult stock becomes senescent and the population will decline to a low level. Rearing to an advanced fingerling stage (2nd option) may have a higher chance of success if competition or depredation Northern Bioscience 61 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions at the fry stage is the source of recruitment failure. However, the difficulties and costs of pond culture and current absence of infrastructure make this option unviable. Stocking of adults was not recommended. Although there was a strong year‐class after adult transfers in 1989 and 1991, this may have been a coincidence and the year classes have been produced suggests that the genetic stock or a physiological factor is not the problem. The successful hatching of eggs in a hatchery also discounts the probability of a physiological problem. Stocking with a secondary, pelagic predator such as splake to potentially reduce the smelt abudnance was not recommended. The objective of stocking with a secondary predator would be to reduce smelt abundance to the point that some escapement of walleye fry could occur. A secondary benefit might be a fishery for the stocked fish. The preferred species for stocking would be a pelagic predator such as splake or rainbow trout, both of which are readily available from the provincial fish culture system. The late summer thermal habitat in Cloud Lake is likely limiting for splake (see 5.1.6 Thermal Regime and Dissolved Oxygen), and Cloud Lake already has a large population of smelt‐consuming predators and a very diverse fish community. MacIntosh and Scholten (2005) recommended that assessment of recruitment should be continued. Small mesh gill netting is recommended, instead of boat electro‐fishing, due to the limited shallow littoral area in most of the lake (limits electro‐fishing efficiency). 7.3 SmallmouthBassFishery
Although there has never been a creel survey on Cloud Lake nor any fisheries assessment on Cloud Lake since 1999, anecdotal reports suggest a recent decline in the average size and condition of smallmouth bass. No quantitative data are available to confirm this, and the possible cause remain unknown. Smallmouth bass angling regulations for Cloud Lake follow those for Fisheries Management Zone 6 i.e., open all year, with a catch limit of four (two for Conservation Licence) and no size restrictions. 7.4 ImpactsofRustyCrayfishonFishHabitat
Rusty crayfish invasions can have lead to significant ecological changes. Although rusty crayfish levels appear to be currently at a low level in Cloud Lake, they have the potential to displace native O. virilis crayfish (Capelli 1982), destroy macrophyte beds (Olsen et al. 1991), compete with fishes for invertebrate prey, and decrease recruitment rates of sport fishes by eating eggs and removing macrophyte habitat (Capelli and Magnuson 1983; Lodge and Lorman 1987). Submerged aquatic vegetation used to be dense near public boat launch at Cloud Lake but has appeared to decline significantly in recent years, not necessarily coincident with introduction of rusty crayfish. Rusty crayfish levels may be too low, at least on southern shore, to be Northern Bioscience 62 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions responsible for decline. Theoretically, increased P should benefit submergents, but if P is not limiting this may not be the case. As part of a full‐lake experiment, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources instated strict regulations to protect and enhance populations of crayfish predators in Sparkling Lake (64 ha, max depth 20 m). In addition to crayfish trapping, the minimum length of smallmouth was increased from 356 mm to 457 mm total length, and the daily bag limit was decreased from 5 to 1 fish. The results of their study (Hein et al. 2006) suggested that the combination of trapping and fish predation can control established rusty crayfish populations and deserves further consideration for management. 8 DataGapsandRecommendations
8.1 PotentialDataGaps
Potential data gaps include current information on the following:  state of existing disposal systems;  aquatic macrophytes, especially distribution and abundance;  periphyton and other algae, especially abundance and species composition;  benthic invertebrate community, especially species composition and abundance of rusty crayfish;  cisco and white sucker, especially status of populations;  smallmouth bass, especially condition and recruitment  walleye, especially age‐class distribution and recruitment 8.2 Recommendations
To be determined based on outcome of April workshop. Northern Bioscience 63 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 9 Glossary
EP: Environmental Protection FL: Fork Length FWIN: Fall Walleye Index Netting Ha: Hectare (1 ha = 10,000 m2 = 2.47 acres) MEI: Morpho‐edapic Index MMAH: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing MNR: Ministry of Natural Resources, abbreviation for OMNRF MOE: Ministry of Environment, abbreviation for OMOECC OMB: Ontario Municipal Board OMNRF: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry OMOECC: Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change OP: Official Plan PSW: Provincially Significant Wetland PWQ: Provincial Water Quality SSA: Shoreline Stewardship Association TBDHU: Thunder Bay District Health Unit TDS: Total Dissolved Solids TL: Total Length TP: Total Phosphorous Northern Bioscience 64 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions 10LiteratureCited
Barton, B.A. and T.P. Barry. 2011. Reproduction and Environmental Biology. Pages 199–232 in B. A. Barton [ed.]. Biology, management, and culture of walleye and sauger. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland. Berubé, D., and L. Kraft. 2010. Invasion of rusty crayfish into (Orconectes rusticus) Whitefish Lake, Ontario. Ont. Min. Natur. Resour., Northwest Sci. and Info, NWSI Aquatic Update 2010‐3. 8 pp. Blokpoel, H., Ryder, J.P., Seddon, I., Carswell, W.R., 1980. Colonial waterbirds nesting in Canadian Lake Superior in 1978. Can. Wildl. Serv. Progress Note 118, Ottawa, ON. Blokpoel, H. and Tessier, G.D. 1993. Atlas of colonial waterbirds nesting on the Canadian Great Lakes, 1989‐1991. Part 1. Cormorants and gulls and island‐nesting terns on Lake Superior in 1989. Technical Report Series No. 181. Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada. Nepean, ON. 96 p. Bryan, M.D., and D.L. Scarnecchia. 1992. Species richness, composition, and abundance of fish larvae inhabiting natural and developed shorelines of a glacial Iowa lake. Environmental Biology of Fishes 35:329‐34. Capelli, G.M. 1982. Displacement of northern Wisconsin crayfish by O. rusticus (Girard). Limnol. Oceanogr. 27: 741–745. Capelli, G.M., and J.J. Magnuson. 1983. Morphoedaphic and biogeographic analysis of crayfish distribution in northern Wisconsin. J. Crustac. Biol. 3: 548–564. Chow‐Fraser, P. 2006. Development of the Water Quality Index (WQI) to assess effects of basin‐
wide land‐use alteration on Coastal Marshes of the Laurentian Great Lakes. pp. 137‐166 in T.P. Simon and P.M. Stewart [eds.]. Coastal Wetlands: Health, Habitat, and Indicators. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida. Chow‐Fraser, P. And A. Wilson. 2002. Ecological status of Cloud Bay, a coastal wetland of Lake Superior. Report prepared for the Shoreline Stewardship Association of Cloud Bay and Little Trout Bay, Thunder Bay, ON. 14 p. Colby, P.J., R.E., McNicol, R.A, Ryder. 1979. Synopsis of biological data on the walleye Stizostedion v. vitreum. Fisheries Synopsis No. 119. Food and Agriculture Organization. Rome, Italy. 139 p. Corbett, B. W., and P. M. Powles. 1986. Spawning and larval drift of sympatric walleyes and white suckers in an Ontario stream. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 115: 41‐46. Northern Bioscience 65 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Crocker, D.W., and D.W. Barr. 1968. Handbook of the crayfishes of Ontario. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 158 p. Dillon, P.J. and F.H. Rigler. 1975. A simple method for predicting the capacity of a lake for development based on lake trophic status. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 31: 1771‐1778. Environmental Registry. 2015. Website: http://www.ebr.gov.on.ca/ERS‐WEB‐
External/displaynoticecontent.do?noticeId=MTc2NDQ=&statusId=MTYyNDgz [accessed March 2015]. Engel, S. and J.L. Pederson Jr. 1998. The construction, aesthetics and effects of lakeshore development: A literature review. Wisconsin Dept. Nat. Resources, Research Report 177, Woodruff. 45 p. Evans, Rosalie. 2015. Solicitor‐Clerk, Municipality of Neebing, ON. E‐mail to R. Foster, February 24, 2015. Foster R.F., and A.G. Harris. 2008. Impact Assessment for Proposed Cottage Development on Lerome and Plateau Lakes Prepared for Technologic Timer by Northern Bioscience, Thunder Bay, ON. 48 pp. Foster R.F., and A.G. Harris. 1998. Wetland Evaluation ‐Pearson Township Wetland. Prepared for Ont. Min. Natur. Resour. by Northern Bioscience, Thunder Bay, ON. 55 pp. Foster, R.F. and A.G. Harris. 2000. Cloud Bay Wetland Evaluation. Unpublished report. . 41 p. + app Foster, R. F., K. Jackson, and T. Marshall. 2014. 2013 Abie‐Marmion Weir Spawning Study. Unpublished report for Ontario Power Generation by Northern Bioscience, Thunder Bay, ON. 26 p. Friday, M.J., and D.A. Wojick. 2013. An assessment of Cloud Lake’s crayfish community, 2012. Ont. Min. Natur. Resour., Northwest Sci. & Info, NWSI Aquatics Update 2013–1. 4 pp. Friday, M.J., and D.A. Wojick. 2013. An assessment of Whitefish Lake’s crayfish community. Ont. Min.Natur. Resour., Northwest Sci. and Info, NWSI Aquatic Update, 2013‐2. 7 pp. Gaeta, J.W. , T. R. Hrabik, G.G. Sass, B.M. Roth, S.J. Gilbert, and M.J. Vander Zanden. 2015. A whole‐lake experiment to control invasive rainbow smelt (Actinoperygii, Osmeridae) via overharvest and a food web manipulation. Hydrobiologia 746:433‐444. Graham, D.M., and Sprules, W.G. 1992. Size and species selection of zooplankton by larval and juvenile walleye (Stizostedion vitreum vitreum) in Oneida Lake, New York. Can. J. Zool. 70(10): 2059–2067. Northern Bioscience 66 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Harris, A.G., S.C. McMurray, P.W.C.Uhlig, J.K.Jeglum, R.F. Foster and G.D. Racey. 1996. Field guide to the wetland ecosystem classification for northwestern Ontario. Ont. Min. Natur. Resour., Northwest Sci.&Technol. Thunder Bay, Ont. Field Guide FG‐01. 74 pp. + Append. Hartviksen, C. and W. Momot. 1987. Fishes of the Thunder Bay area of Ontario: A Guide for Identifying and Location the Local Fish Fauna. Wildwood Publications, Thunder Bay, ON. 282 p. Hein, C.L., B.M. Roth, A.R. Ives, and M.J. Vander Zanden. 2006. Fish predation and trapping for rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus) control: a whole‐lake experiment. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 63: 383–393. Houde, E.D. 1967. Food of pelagic young of the walleye, Stizostedion vitreum vitreum, in Oneida Lake, New York. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 96(1): 17–24. Hrabik, T.R., Magnuson, J.J., and McLain, A.S. 1998. Predicting the effects of rainbow smelt on native fishes in small lakes: Evidence from long‐term research on two lakes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 55: 1364‐1371. Hynde, Paul Associates Incorporated. 2008. Official Plan for the Municipality of Neebing. 49 p. Available at http://www.neebing.org/planning.html [accessed Mar 2015]. Holm, E., N.E. Mandrak and M.E. Burridge. 2009 Freshwater Fishes of Ontario. Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, ON. 462 pp. Johnson, F.H. and J.G. Hale. 1977. Interrelationships between walleye (Sitzostedion vitruem vitreum) and smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui) in four northeastern Minnesota lakes., 1948‐69. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 34(10): 1626‐1632. Johnson, M.E. and R. H. Lemelin. 2010. Wetland Protection and Recreational Development Conflict in a Rural Bedroom Community in Northern Ontario. Pp 190‐198 in K.B. Beesley [ed.]. The Rural‐urban Fringe in Canada: Conflict and Controversy. Brandon University (Rural Development Institute), Brandon, MB. 374 p. Kerr, S.J., B.W. Corbett, N.J. Hutchinson, D. Kinsman, J.H. Leach, D. Puddister, L. Stanfield and N. Ward. 1997. Walleye habitat: A synthesis of current knowledge with guidelines for conservation. Percid Community Synthesis, Walleye Habitat Working Group, Ont. Min. Nat. Resour., Peterborough, ON. 82 pp. Krishka, B.A., 1988a. Trophy walleye investigations in Arrow Lake, Cloud Lake and Sandstone Lake during August, 1987. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Thunder Bay, Ontario. Krishka, B.A. 1988b. Supplemental assessment of walleye populations in Arrow Lake and Cloud Lake. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Thunder Bay, Ontario. Lawrie, A.H. 1978. The fish community of Lake Superior. J. Great Lakes Res. 4(3‐4): 513‐549. Northern Bioscience 67 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Lodge, D.M., and J.G. Lorman. 1987. Reductions in submersed macrophyte biomass and species richness by the crayfish Orconectes rusticus. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 44: 591‐597. Lodge, D.M., M.W Kershner, J.E. Aloi, and A.P. Covich. 1994. Effects of an omnivorous crayfish (Orconectes rusticus) on a freshwater littoral food web. Ecology 75(5): 1265‐1281. Lynch, W.E. and D.L. Johnson. 1989. Influences of interstice size, shade, and predators on the use of artificial structures by bluegills. N. Am. J. Fish. Manage. 9: 219–225. Maki, L.W. 1979. The water quality of Cloud Lake, Crooks Township, District of Thunder Bay. Ontario Ministry of Environment, Thunder Bay. Draft report, December 1979. 11 p. + attachments. Maki, L.W. 1980. The water quality of Cloud Lake, Crooks Township, District of Thunder Bay. Ontario Ministry of Environment, Thunder Bay. Final report, January 1980. 11 p. McCarragher, D.B. and R.E. Thomas. 1972. Ecological significance of vegetation to northern pike, Esox lucius, spawning. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 1972(3):560‐563. MacIntosh, K.J. and S.J. Scholten. 2004. An assessment of the Cloud Lake walleye population based on the Fall Walleye Index Netting (FWIN) survey conducted in 1999. Ont. Min. Natur. Resour., Thunder Bay, ON. Unpublished report. 18 pp. McMahon, E.T., J.W. Terrell and P.C. Nelson. 1984. Habitat Suitability Information: Walleye. Fish and Wildlife Services, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC. FWS/OBS‐
82/10.56. 44 pp. McPhail, J. D., and C. C. Lindsey. 1970. Freshwater fishes of northwestern Canada and Alaska. Fisheries Research Board of Canada Bulletin 173, Ottawa. Minnesota Sea Grant. 2012. Non‐native species found in Lake Superior since 1883. Website http://www.seagrant.umn.edu/ais/superior_nonnatives. Accessed February 2012. Momot, W.T. 1995. Redefining the role of crayfish in aquatic ecosystems. Reviews in Fisheries Science. 3(1): 33‐64. Momot, W.T. 1992. Further range extensions of the crayfish Orconectes rusticus in the Lake Superior Basin of northwestern Ontario. Can. Field Nat. 106: 397‐399. Momot, W.T., C. Hartviksen, and G. Morgan. 1988. A range extension for the crayfish Orconectes rusticus: Sibley Provincial Park, northwestern Ontario (Canada). Can. Field Nat. 102: 547‐548. Morgan, G.E. 2002. Manual of instructions – fall walleye index netting (FWIN). Percid Community Synthesis, Diagnostics and Sampling Standards Working Group. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 34 p. Northern Bioscience 68 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Morgan, G.E., M.D. Malette, R.S. Kushneriuk, and S.E. Mann. 2003. Regional Summaries of walleye life history characteristics based on Ontario’s fall walleye index netting (FWIN) program, 1993‐2001. Diagnostics and Sampling Standards Working Group, Percid Community Synthesis, February 2003. Ontario, Canada. 192 p. Marshall, T.R. and P.A. Ryan. 1987. Abundance patterns and community attributes of fishes relative to environmental gradients. Can. J. Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 44(Suppl. 2): 19‐215. McDonnell, K.N. and B.M. Roth. 2014. Evaluating the effect of pelagic zooplankton community composition and density on larval walleye (Sander vitreus) growth with a bioenergetic‐
based foraging model. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 71: 1039–1049. Mercado‐Silva, N., Sass, G.G., Roth, B.M., Gilbert, S., and Vander Zanden, M.J. 2007. Impact of rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax) invasion on walleye (Sander vitreus) recruitment in Wisconsin lakes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 64(11): 1543–1550. Mollard, D.G. and J.D. Mollard. 1980. Northern Ontario Engineering Geology and Terrain Study, Data Base Map, Lac des Milles Lacs Area, Ontario Geological Survey Map 5024, Scale 1:100,000. Morris, R.D., Weseloh, D.V., Pekarik, C., 2008. Colonial nesting waterbirds in the Canadian and U.S. waters of Lake Superior: patterns in colony distribution and breeding population numbers (1976–2000). In: Munawar, M., Heath, R. (Eds.), State of Lake Superior, pp. 583–
624. Ecovision World Monograph Series, Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management Society. Olsen, T.M., D.M. Lodge, G.M., Capelli, and R.J. Houlihan. 1991. Mechanisms of impact of introduced crayfish (Orconectes rusticus) on littoral congeners, snails, and macrophytes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 48: 1853–1861. Ontario's Invading Species Awareness Program (OISAP). 2015. Rusty Crayfish. Website: http://www.invadingspecies.com/invaders/invertebrates/rusty‐crayfish/ [accessed March 2015]. Ontario Ministry of the Environment (OMOE). 1994. Provincial Water quality objectives. Queen’s Printer for Ontario. Ontario Ministry of the Environment (OMOE). 1998. Long‐term monitoring of trophic status: The value of total phsphorus concentration at spring overturn. OMOE, Environmental Sciences and Standards, Division, Dorset Environmental Science Centre. Technical Bulletin No. DESC‐25. 2 p. Northern Bioscience 69 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Ontario Ministry of the Environment (OMOE). 1980. Cottage pollution control program: Cloud, Hakweye and One Island Lakes, Thunder Bay District. Municiable and Private Abatement Section, OMOE, Thunder Bay. Unpublished report. 19 p. + attachments. Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (OMMAH). Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR). 2014a. General Habitat Description for the Eastern Whip‐poor‐will (Caprimulgus vociferous). 4 p. Available at http://files.ontario.ca/environment‐and‐energy/species‐at‐
risk/mnr_sar_ghd_whp_pr_wll_en.pdf Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (OMNRF). 2014b. Species at risk in Ontario List. Available at http://www.ontario.ca/environment‐and‐energy/species‐risk‐ontario‐
list Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR). 2005. Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage Policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. 245 p. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR).1988. Timber Management Guidelines for the Protection of Fish Habitat, Ont. Min. Nat. Resour., 14 p. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR). 1987b. Aquatic Habitat Inventory Surveys: Manual of Instructions, Fisheries Branch. Queen’s printer for Ontario. Toronto, ON. 247 p. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR). 1976. Lake Survey ‐ Cloud Lake. Aquatic Habitat Inventory Program, Ont. Min. Natur. Resour., Thunder Bay. Phillips, I.D. 2010. Biological synopsis of the Rusty Crayfish (Orconectes rusticus). Can. Manuscr. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2923: iv + 17 p. Phillips, I.D., R.D. Vinebrooke, and M.A. Turner. 2009. Ecosystem consequences of potential range expansions of Orconectes virilis and Orconectes rusticus crayfish in Canada – a review. Environmental Reviews 17: 235‐248. Priegel, G.R. 1970. Reproduction and early life history of the walleye in the Lake Winnebago region. Technical Bulletin 45. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Madison, Wisconsin. 105 p. Pugh, D. 1992. Report on the water quality of Cloud Lake, Crooks Township, District of Thunder Bay. Ont. Min. Environment, Thunder Bay. Unpublished report. 12 p + app. Raabe, J.K. 2006. Walleye (Sander vitreus) Spawning Habitat Selection and Dynamics in a North‐Temperate Wisconsin Lake. Unpublished MSc. Thesis, University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point, WI. 194 p. Northern Bioscience 70 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Racey, G.D., A.G. Harris, J.K. Jeglum, R.F. Foster and G.M. Wickware. 1996. Terrestrial and wetland ecosites of northwestern Ontario. Ont. Min. Natur. Resour., Northwest Sci. & Technol. Thunder Bay, Ont. Field Guide FG‐02. 88 pp. + Append. Ridgway, M.S. 1988. Developmental stage of offspring and brood defense in smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui). Can J. Zool. 66: 1722‐1728. Rooney, R.C., and Paterson, M.J. 2009. Ecosystem effects of Rainbow Smelt (Osmerus mordax) invasions in inland lakes: a literature review. Can. Tech.Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2845(iv): 1–
33. Rosenberg, D.M., M.A. Turner, T. Mosindy and D.A.Watkenson. 2010. Threats to Lake of the Woods and the Winnipeg River by the rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus), an aquatic invader. Ont. Min. Natur. Resour., Northwest Sci. & Info., Workshop Rpt. TWR‐005.54 pp. + append. Roth, B.M. andJ.F. Kitchell 2005. The role of size‐selective predation in the displacement of Orconectes crayfishes following rusty crayfish invasion. Crustaceana 78(3):297‐310. Rowe, S. J. 1972. Forest Regions of Canada. Canadian Forest Service, Ottawa. Publication No. 1300. 172 p. Statlander, J. 2006. Letter to Municipality of Neebing re. Cloud Lake. February 28, 2006. 2 p. + attachements. Taylor, R.M., P. Hamr, and A. Karstaad. 2005. Crayfishes. In: G. Winterton (ed.), The comprehensive bait guide for eastern Canada, the Great Lakes Region and northeastern United States. 222 – 317 pp. University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario. Scott, W.B. and E.J. Crossman 1998. Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Galt House Publications Ltd., Oakville, ON. Sea Grant. 2015. Parasites of Freshwater Fish. Website: http://www.seagrant.umn.edu/fisheries/parasites [accessed March 2015]. Sims, R.A. W.D. Towill, K.A. Baldwin, P. Uhlig, and G.M. Wickware. 1997. Field Guide to the Forest Ecosystem Classification for Northwestern Ontario. Ont. Min. Natur. Resour., Northwest Sci. & Technol. Thunder Bay, Ont. Field Guide FG‐03. 176 pp. Suttie, A. 2014. Cloud River Watershed Assessment Report. Lakehead Region Conservation Authority. 155 p. Taillon, D. and M.G. Fox. 2004. The influence of residential and cottage development on littoral zone fish communities in a mesotrophic north temperate lake. Environmental Biol. Fishes 71: 275–285. Northern Bioscience 71 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Van Den Avyle, M.J. 1993. Dynamics of exploited fish populations. Pages 105‐135 In C.C. Kohler and W.A. Hubert, editors. Inland fisheries management in North America. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland. Vander Wal, J. 21985. Cloud Lake Water Quality. Memorandum to M. Sutterfield. Ontario Ministry of the Enviroment, Thunder Bay. 5 p. Weseloh, D.V.C., Pekarik, C., Havelka, T., Barrett, C., Reid, J., 2002. Population trends and colony locations of DCCOs in the Canadian Great Lakes and immediately adjacent areas, 1990–
2000: a manager's guide. J. Great Lakes Res. 28, 125–144. Wilson, K.A. 2002. Impacts of the invasive rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus) in northern Wisconsin lakes. Ph.D. thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisc. Northern Bioscience 72 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Appendix 1. Cloud Lake Shoreline Imagery Photo‐Series (OMNR Imagery). Consistent scale for all images. East shore of Cloud Lake west to public boat launch (arrow)
Northern Bioscience 73 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions North shore of Cloud Lake west of public boat launch (arrow) Northern Bioscience 74 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northwest shore of Cloud Lake Northern Bioscience 75 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions West shore of Cloud Lake by former bible summer camp (arrow). Northern Bioscience 76 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Southwest shore of Cloud Lake by Loyal Order of the Moose trailer park. Northern Bioscience 77 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Appendix 2. Cloud River (OMNR Imagery). Cloud Lake to Highway 61.
Northern Bioscience 78 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Highway 61 to Cloud Bay. Northern Bioscience 79 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Appendix 3. Coordinates of past water sampling stations in Cloud Lake. Year Station # Site Description 1973 1 W end, deep spot‐MOE
1976 1 W end, deep spot‐MNR
1981 1 W end, deep spot‐MOE
1991 1 E end, deep spot 1991 2 West Cove 1991 3 W end, deep spot‐MOE
1991 4 Moose Lodge Cove
1991 5 Outlet 2003 1 W end, deep spot 2003 3 E end, deep spot 2004 1 W end, deep spot 2004 3 E end, deep spot 2005 1 W end, deep spot 2005 3 E end, deep spot 2008 1 W end, deep spot 2013 2 W end, deep spot‐MOE
2013 3 E end, deep spot Easting Northing Source
310864 5334422 Pugh 1992
310778 5334520 OMNR 1976
310990 5334422 Pugh 1992
311682 5335249 Pugh 1992
310312 5334660 Pugh 1992
310995 5334278 Pugh 1992
311008 5333344 Pugh 1992
311965 5333420 Pugh 1992
311239 5334542 Lake Partner Database 311745 5335452 Lake Partner Database 311239 5334542 Lake Partner Database 311745 5335452 Lake Partner Database 311239 5334542 Lake Partner Database 311745 5335452 Lake Partner Database 311239 5334542 Lake Partner Database 310769 5334094 Lake Partner Database 311745 5335452 Lake Partner Database Northern Bioscience 80 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience 81 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Appendix 4. Location of LRCA water sampling stations in the Cloud River Watershed, 2014. Northern Bioscience 82 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Appendix 5. Summary of 2014 LRCA water sampling in the Cloud River watershed. Northern Bioscience 83 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience 84 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience 85 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience 86 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Appendix 6. Results of 1990‐91 microbiological of water samples from Cloud Lake (Pugh 1992). Northern Bioscience 87 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Appendix 7. Results of 1990‐91 phytoplankton sampling by MOE (Pugh 1992). Northern Bioscience 88 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience 89 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Appendix 8. Results of Benthic invertebrates 1990‐1991 sampling for benthic invertebrates in Cloud Lake (Pugh 2992). See Figure 23 for sampling locations. Northern Bioscience 91 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience 92 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience 93 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience 94 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience 95 Cloud Lake ‐ Background Conditions Northern Bioscience 96