A New Myxosporidian Parasite, the Cause of "Wormy" Halibut
No abstract available at this time
Bureau of Fisheries Document↗
SEARCH · USGS Science
Results for “Bureau of Fisheries Document”
Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Fish culture: an annotated bibliography of publications of the National Fisheries Center, Leetown, 1972-1980
This is an annotated bibliography of the publications authored or co-authored by the staff of the National Fisheries Center - Leetown (NFC-L) from 1972 through 1980. It includes publications from NFC-L staff at the Fish Farming Experimental Station, Stuttgart, AR; the Fish Genetics Laboratory, Beulah, WY; the Hagerman Field Station of the Tunison Laboratory of Fish Nutrition, Hagerman, ID; the National Fisheries Research and Development Laboratory, Marison, AL; and, the Tunison Laboratory of Fish Nutrition, Cortland, NY. It also includes publications from NFC-L staff at the Aquaculture Production/Demonstration Station, Fisheries Academy, Fish Genetics Station, National Fish Health Research Laboratory, and Technical Information Services, each located in Kearneysville, WV. Prior to 1977, each functioned as a separate entity within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In 1977, the administrative and program activities of these components were merged into the Natkonal Fisheries Center. This bibliography lists the publications issued by each of these entities both before and after becoming joined into the Center. Publications from these components prior to 1972 are documents in U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Resource Publication 120, Bibliography of Research Publications of the U.S. Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, 1928-72 . Entries in this bibliography are arranged under broad subject categories, similar to those used in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sport Fishery Abstracts . Within these categories, the publications are then arranged alphabetically by author and sequentially by date of publication. They cover a wide range of scientific and technical disciplines applicable to the field of aquaculture. The annotations were submitted by each NFC-L component, and were modified to some extent for uniformity. An author index is included at the end of the bibliography.
Report↗
Estimates of growth and mortality of under-yearling smallmouth bass in Spednic Lake, from 1970 through 2008
This report is the product of a 2013 cooperative agreement between the U.S. Geological Survey, the International Joint Commission, and the Maine Bureau of Sea Run Fisheries and Habitat to quantify the effects of meteorological conditions (from 1970 through 2008) on the survival of smallmouth bass ( Micropterus dolomieu ) in the first year of life in Spednic Lake. This report documents the data and methods used to estimate historical daily mean lake surface-water temperatures from early spring through late autumn, which were used to estimate the dates of smallmouth bass spawning, young-of-the-year growth, and probable strength of each year class. Mortality of eggs and fry in nests was modeled and estimated to exceed 10 percent in 17 of 39 years; during those years, cold temperatures in the early part of the spawning period resulted in mortality to fish that were estimated to have had the longest growing season and attain the greatest length. Modeled length-dependent overwinter survival combined with early mortality identified 1986, 1994, 1996, and 2004 as the years in which temperature was likely to have presented the greatest challenge to year-class strength in the Spednic Lake fishery. Age distribution of bass in fisheries on lakes in the St. Croix and surrounding watersheds confirmed that conditions in 1986 and 1996 resulted in weak smallmouth bass year classes (age-four or age-five bass representing less than 15 percent of a 100-fish sample).
Maine↗
Themes of contemporary inland fisheries goals
Goals are important for the effective execution of public trust responsibilities by state inland fisheries bureaus, but formulating meaningful goals is not simple. Often bureaus look to their past and to their sister bureaus in neighboring states when crafting goals for their own freshwater resources. Herein, we review the goal themes of fisheries bureaus using publicly available documents and guided by previous literature. We test whether goals exhibit geographic patterns presuming that differences and similarities in climate, natural resources, and people determine, to various degrees, the goal themes across the U.S. We identified nine distinct goal themes but found that they do not form clear geographic patterns, which contrasts with a similar analysis conducted in the 1970s. Since the 1970s, fisheries bureau goals have expanded and regionalism in goals has vanished. We suggest that changes in perspectives and communication technology, as well as provisions within nationwide funding mechanisms have led to goals becoming more homogenous across the U.S. and more diverse within each bureau.
Fisheries Magazine↗
Faces from the past: Frederic Morton Chamberlain (1867-1921), pioneer fishery biologist of the American West
The life of Frederic Morton Chamberlain (1867–1921) was marked by his many contributions to fishery science. As an assistant with the old U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, he pioneered life history studies of salmon in California and Alaska, and assisted in the collection of hundreds of thousands of natural history specimens from the Pacific Ocean as resident naturalist on the U.S.S. Albatross . He was innovative in the use of field photography in fishery work, and the design and construction of capture nets and collecting gear. His detailed reports were important in documenting the conditions of the native ichthyofauna in Alaska, Arizona, and California at the turn of the century and have been heavily relied upon by subsequent investigators. His ability to design and conduct scientifically justifiable studies to solve fishery problems while under many kinds of hardships is a testament to his background and dedication to the field. He represents the prototype of the modern fishery biologist.
Fisheries↗
A characterization of deep-sea coral and sponge communities along the California and Oregon coast using a remotely operated vehicle on the EXPRESS 2018 expedition
Deep-sea coral and sponge (DSCS) communities serve as essential fish habitats (EFH) by providing shelter and nursery habitat, increasing diversity, and increasing prey availability (Freese and Wing, 2003; Bright, 2007; Baillon et al., 2012; Henderson et al., 2020). Threats to these long-lived, fragile organisms from bottom contact fishing gear, potential offshore renewable energy development, and ocean warming and acidification have increased the need for DSCS research along the U.S. West Coast (Gomez et al., 2018; Salgado et al., 2018; Yoklavich, et al., 2018; Gugliotti et al., 2019). The focus of these studies has varied from species distribution and abundance (Yoklavich and Love, 2005; Tissot et al., 2006) to developing and validating predictive distribution models (Huff et al., 2013; Rooper et al., 2017; Kreidler, 2020) to finding medicinal uses for corals and sponges (Essack et al., 2011; Shrestha et al., 2018). Due to the vast area of unexplored seafloor within the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ; 200 nautical miles off the coast) and the technological requirements and expanse of deep-sea research, there is still much to learn about the distributions and biology of DSCS. This information is critical to resource managers for effective conservation and management of DSCS habitats. Protections are provided by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) designation of groundfish EFH conservation areas (EFHCA) and the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA). Areas designated as EFHCA are closed to bottom trawl fishing to protect and preserve seafloor habitats. Recently the PFMC adopted Amendment 28 to the Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (GFMP; Pacific Fishery Management Council, 2019) which modified EFHCAs by closing new areas identified as vulnerable and reopening areas deemed not vulnerable. The NMSA prohibits bottom disturbance from certain activities within areas designated as national marine sanctuaries, such as oil and gas exploration or extraction, cable laying, and other forms of seabed alteration or construction that disturb benthic communities. NOAA’s Deep-Sea Coral and Research Technology Program (DSCRTP) began a 4-yr funding initiative for the U.S. West Coast in 2017. The goals of the West Coast Deep-Sea Coral Initiative (WCDSCI) were to: 1) gather baseline information on areas subject to fishing regulation changes prior to the implementation of Amendment 28; 2) improve our understanding of known DSCS bycatch “hot spots”; and 3) explore and assess DSCS resources within NOAA National Marine Sanctuaries with emphasis on areas of sanctuary resource protection and management concerns. During the first year of the program, a research cruise was developed to survey the West Coast from Oregon to California studying the DSCS ecosystems in priority areas. The 31-day expedition (9 Oct – 8 Nov, 2018) was launched from the NOAA Ship Bell M. Shimada, beginning in Newport, OR and ending in San Diego, CA. The science team assembled for this cruise were members of the EXpanding Pacific Research and Exploration of Submerged Systems (EXPRESS) campaign, which brings together researchers from federal and nonfederal institutions to collaborate on scientific expeditions targeting the deepwater areas off California, Oregon, and Washington. EXPRESS supports researchers leveraging funding, resources, personnel, and expertise to accomplish more science than would have been possible by a single entity alone. The 2018 coastwide expedition included research partners from National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC) and Northwest Fisheries Science Center (NWFSC), National Ocean Service (Channel Islands, Cordell Bank, Greater Farallones, and Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuaries), Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI). Research objectives for the cruise were to: 1) Collect DSCS baseline information at 10 of the EFHCA sites undergoing protection modifications by the Pacific Fishery Management Council. 2) Collect DSCS and fish data at previously unexplored sites within West Coast National Marine Sanctuaries. 3) Revisit a subset of previously surveyed sites to document if changes in DCSC have occurred over time. 4) Collect information to validate BOEM supported cross-shelf habitat suitability models for DSCS. 5) Collect samples to help in identifying (and understanding) West Coast DSCS and expand use of new technologies (ROV, AUV, and environmental DNA [eDNA]). 6) Collect water samples for coastwide eDNA, nutrient, and carbon chemistry studies.
California, Oregon↗
Methow River Studies, Washington: abundance estimates from Beaver Creek and the Chewuch River screw trap, methodology testing in the Whitefish Island side channel, and survival and detection estimates from hatchery fish releases, 2013
Salmon and steelhead populations have been severely depleted in the Columbia River from factors such as the presence of tributary dams, unscreened irrigation diversions, and habitat degradation from logging, mining, grazing, and others (Raymond, 1988). The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has been funded by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) to provide evaluation of on-going Reclamation funded efforts to recover Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed anadromous salmonid populations in the Methow River watershed, a watershed of the Columbia River in the Upper Columbia River Basin, in north-central Washington State (fig. 1). This monitoring and evaluation program was funded to document Reclamation’s effort to partially fulfill the 2008 Federal Columbia River Power System Biological Opinion (BiOp) (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, Fisheries Division 2003). This Biological Opinion includes Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPA) to protect listed salmon and steelhead across their life cycle. Species of concern in the Methow River include Upper Columbia River (UCR) spring Chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ), UCR summer steelhead ( O. mykiss ), and bull trout ( Salvelinus confluentus ), which are all listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA. The work done by the USGS since 2004 has encompassed three phases of work. The first phase started in 2004 and continued through 2012. This first phase involved the evaluation of stream colonization and fish production in Beaver Creek following the modification of several water diversions (2000–2006) that were acting as barriers to upstream fish movement. Products to date from this work include: Ruttenburg (2007), Connolly and others (2008), Martens and Connolly (2008), Connolly (2010), Connolly and others (2010), Martens and Connolly (2010), Benjamin and others (2012), Romine and others (2013a), Weigel and others (2013a, 2013b, 2013c), and Martens and others (2014). The second phase, initiated in 2008, focuses on the evaluation of the M2 reach (rkm 66– 80) of the mainstem Methow River prior to restoration actions planned by Reclamation and Yakama Nation. The M2 study was designed to help understand the inter-relationships between stream habitat and the life history of various fish species to explain potential success or limitations in response to restoration actions. To help document changes derived by restoration, two reference reaches (Upper Methow between rkm 85 and 90, and Chewuch River between rkm 4 and 11) were identified based on relative lack of disturbance, proximity to the restoration reach, and relative unconfined geomorphology. A control reach (Lower Methow between rkm 57 and 64, also referred to as “Silver Reach”) was 2 identified based on its similar disturbance as the reference reach, proximity to the restoration reach, and relatively unconfined geomorphology. Products to date include Barber and others (2011), Bellmore (2011), Tibbits and others (2012), Bellmore and others (2013), Benjamin and others (2013), Romine and others (2013b), Bellmore and other (2014), Martens and others (2014), and Martens and Connolly (2014). The third phase of work has been to help with the development and to provide data for modeling efforts. Most of the planned M2 reach restoration is focused on the creation or improvement of offchannel habitat, especially side channels. The pre-restoration portion of this study has been documented by Martens and Connolly (2014). Side channel restoration actions were initiated in 2012 (Whitefish Island side channel, also referred to as SC3; rkm 76) and are planned to continue over the next several years. The Whitefish Island side channel was modified to maintain hydrological connection with the mainstem throughout the year. In addition, several log structures were installed and pools were deepened to create fish habitat. Prior to restoration, this side channel would lose hydrological connection with the mainstem Methow River, leaving one large pool near the bottom of the side channel and several shallow isolated pools that may or may not go dry. In seasonally connected side channels, juvenile salmonid survival in pools less than 100 cm average depth was lower than in pools greater than 100 cm average depth (Martens and Connolly, 2014). In this report, we document our field work and analysis completed in 2013. During 2013, USGS sampling efforts were focused on resampling of three reaches in Beaver Creek, testing methodology in the Whitefish Island side channel, conducting hatchery survival estimates, and operating a screw trap on the Chewuch River (funded by Yakama Nation; fig. 1). The Beaver Creek sampling effort was a revisit of three index sites sampled continuously from 2004 to 2007 to look at the fish response to barrier removal. Methodology testing in Whitefish Island side channel was done to determine the best method for evaluating fish populations after restoration efforts in side channels (previous sampling methods were determined to be ineffective after pools were deepened). Hatchery survival estimates were completed to monitor fish survival in the Methow and Columbia Rivers, while the screw trap was operated to estimate migrating fish populations in the Chewuch River and track passive integrated transponder (PIT)-tagged fish. In addition, we maintained a network of PIT-tag interrogation systems (PTIS), assisted Reclamation with fish removal events associated with stream restoration (two people for 9 days; 14 percent of summer field season), and conducted a stream metabolism study designed to help parameterize and calibrate the stream productivity model (Bellmore and others, 2014) with model validation.
Washington↗
Daytime distribution of Pontoporeia affinis off bottom in Lake Michigan
The vertical migration of the amphipod Pontoporeia affinis in Lake Michigan has been well documented by Wells, Marzolf, and McNaught and Hasler. Wells and Marzolf observed Pontoporeia off bottom only at night. McNaught and Hasler, however, found Pontoporeia above the bottom shortly after noon in a 24-hr study on 12 June 1965, and some individuals were taken just below the thermocline in all daylight hours in a similar study on 19-20 August. This paper presents evidence that Pontoporeia regularly were present above bottom during the day from April-August 1964. The data for this report were collected during a study of seasonal and depth distribution of larval bloaters (Coregonus hoyi) in Lake Michigan. Sampling was conducted from the U.S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries RV Cisco off Saugatuck, Michigan, at intervals of about 10 days from 9 April to 14 August 1964. A few samples were taken on 22 August and 15 October.
Limnology and Oceanography↗
History of early diet development in fish culture, 1000 B.C. to A.D. 1955
This paper traces the observations and speculations of early fish culturists as they sought to define the feeds necessary to keep hatchery fish alive. Although prescientific ideas about feeding fish existed in Egypt and China over three millennia ago, it was not until the 1700s that scientific studies of feeding and digestion by fish were documented. Aside from several books that provided early anecdotal accounts of feeds and feeding, much of the technical literature up to the 1930s is found in a few journals and relatively obscure bulletins. Such was the state of knowledge regarding the feeding of fish until about 1927 when Clive McCay, a professor at Yale University, and Abram Tunison, a hatchery worker, began some part‐time research on the nutritional requirements of trout at Connecticut's Burlington Fish Hatchery. In June 1932, these men founded an experimental hatchery, designed to study the nutrition, feeds, and feeding of fish, at Cortland, New York; this hatchery was operated under the auspices of the federal Bureau of Fisheries, the Conservation Department of New York State, and Cornell University. Over the next 25 years, it was research from this hatchery as well as from other federal, state, and university facilities that led to the development of purified test diets and the identification of the (unknown) growth factors in fresh meat, both essential criteria for scientific diet formulation, The first nutritionally complete diets appeared about 1955.
Progressive Fish-Culturist↗
Riparian fencing, grazing, and trout habitat preference on Summit Creek, Idaho
In 1975, 3.2 km of Summit Creek, Idaho were fenced by the Bureau of Land Management to exclude livestock from the riparian area. Six stream sections were electrofished in 1979 to determine differences in trout abundance, size, and growth between grazed and ungrazed stream sections. Electrofishing stations were paired by habitat type. There were more trout in ungrazed sections than in grazed sections in all three habitat types sampled. With one exception, there were more catachable-sized (200 mm long or longer) rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) in the ungrazed area than in the grazed area. There was also evidence that the average size of the fish was less in grazed sections. Fish population data were not collected prior to fencing; therefore, it cannot be firmly concluded that the trout population increased within the livestock enclosure as a result of fencing the riparian area. However, the combined results of previous trout habitat improvements documented for Summit Creek, as a result of the fencing, and this study support the conclusion that trout prefer stream areas in ungrazed habitat over grazed habitat.
Idaho↗
Non-native fish control below Glen Canyon Dam - Report from a structured decision-making project
This report describes the results of a structured decision-making project by the U.S. Geological Survey to provide substantive input to the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) for use in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment concerning control of non-native fish below Glen Canyon Dam. A forum was created to allow the diverse cooperating agencies and Tribes to discuss, expand, and articulate their respective values; to develop and evaluate a broad set of potential control alternatives using the best available science; and to define individual preferences of each group on how to manage the inherent trade-offs in this non-native fish control problem. This project consisted of two face-to-face workshops, held in Mesa, Arizona, October 18-20 and November 8-10, 2010. At the first workshop, a diverse set of objectives was discussed, which represented the range of concerns of those agencies and Tribes present. A set of non-native fish control alternatives ('hybrid portfolios') was also developed. Over the 2-week period between the two workshops, four assessment teams worked to evaluate the control alternatives against the array of objectives. At the second workshop, the results of the assessment teams were presented. Multi-criteria decision analysis methods were used to examine the trade-offs inherent in the problem, and allowed the participating agencies and Tribes to express their individual judgments about how those trade-offs should best be managed in Reclamation`s selection of a preferred alternative. A broad array of objectives was identified and defined, and an effort was made to understand how these objectives are likely to be achieved by a variety of strategies. In general, the objectives reflected desired future conditions over 30 years. A rich set of alternative approaches was developed, and the complex structure of those alternatives was documented. Multi-criteria decision analysis methods allowed the evaluation of those alternatives against the array of objectives, with the values of individual agencies and tribes deliberately preserved. Trout removal strategies aimed at the Paria to Badger Rapid reach (PBR), with a variety of permutations in deference to cultural values, and with backup removal at the Little Colorado River reach (LCR) if necessary, were identified as top-ranking portfolios for all agencies and Tribes. These PBR/LCR removal portfolios outperformed LCR-only removal portfolios, for cultural reasons and for effectiveness - the probability of keeping the humpback chub population above a desired threshold was estimated to be higher under the PBR/LCR portfolios than the LCR-only portfolios. The PBR/LCR removal portfolios also outperformed portfolios based on flow manipulations, primarily because of the effect of sport fishery and wilderness recreation objectives, as well as cultural objectives. The preference for the PBR/LCR removal portfolios was quite robust to variation in the objective weights and to uncertainty about the underlying dynamics, at least over the ranges of uncertainty investigated. Examination of the effect of uncertainty on the recommended outcomes allowed us to complete a 'value of information' analysis. The results of this analysis led to an adaptive strategy that includes three possible long-term management actions (no action; LCR removal; or PBR removal) and seeks to reduce uncertainty about the following two issues: the degree to which rainbow trout limit chub populations, and the effectiveness of PBR removal to reduce trout emigration downstream into Marble and eastern Grand Canyons, where the largest population of humpback chub exist. In the face of uncertainty about the effectiveness of PBR removal, a case might be made for including flow manipulations in an adaptive strategy, but formal analysis of this case was not conducted. The full set of conclusions described above is not definitive, however. This analysis described in this report is a simplified depiction of the t
Open-File Report↗
Quantifying sea otter abundance, distribution, habitat use, and foraging intake in Cook Inlet, Alaska
Following near extirpation from the fur trade, sea otters ( Enhydra lutris ) have returned to occupy lower Cook Inlet since the 1950s, or earlier, with numbers increasing to ~11,000 and ~9,000 on the west and east side, respectively, by 2017. Northward range expansion on the west side has been negligible for decades with few animals found north of Kamishak Bay, while northward expansion on the east side has been more pronounced in recent decades. The reasons for these contrasting distribution patterns are not certain. Possible explanations for lack of expansion on the west side included 1) poor sea otter habitat north of Kamishak Bay; 2) adequate habitat north of Kamishak Bay but no incentive for sea otters to move north because of abundant food in Kamishak Bay, and/or sea otters discouraged from moving north of Kamishak Bay; 3) seasonal ice formation; or 4) seasonal presence of killer whales. This project was designed to document current sea otter abundance and distribution in lower Cook Inlet, including seasonal variation, and evaluate drivers of habitat use and foraging conditions, including how these overlap with Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Lease Sale blocks. We found that the probability of sea otter presence in lower Cook Inlet was significantly related to depth and distance from shore with the highest probabilities of sea otter presence in areas ~7–8 kilometers (km) from shore in water ~20–30 meters (m) deep. Historical survey data suggest sea otter distribution has not changed dramatically since 2002, and while we detected significant seasonal changes including due to presence of heavy sea ice, the seasonal changes were modest and primarily related to locations with consistent winter ice formation on the west side of lower Cook Inlet. Overall, throughout the year, sea otters appeared to be utilizing most of the habitat within the 40-m depth contour on the east side of lower Cook Inlet, including Kachemak Bay. Sea otters on the west side reside largely within Kamishak Bay. Because of the shallow bathymetry of lower Cook Inlet, sea otters consistently occurred farther offshore than in many other areas of Alaska. The presence of sea otters, including females with pups, in these offshore waters indicates that sea otters can forage productively in these open water areas. Importantly, we documented that sea otters, including females with pups, occurred in most of the eastern BOEM lease blocks including the original Lease Sale 244 blocks 7064, 7114, 6162, 6310, 6360, 6410, 6458 and 6457. The relinquishments for these 7 leases were effective September 17, 2024: OCS-Y-02434 (block # 7064), OCS-Y-02435 (7114), OCS-Y-02436 (6162), OCS-Y-02438 (6357), OCS-Y-02442 (6407), OCS-Y02446 (6457), OCS-Y-02447 (6458) https://www.boem.gov/sites/default/files/documents/environment/Map%20of%20Active%20Leases%20 Cook%20Inlet%20OCS_0.pdf Regarding differential northward expansion on the east and west side of lower Cook Inlet, we found that wind and water circulation patterns make winter sea ice more prominent on the west side, but this had minimal effects on sea otter distribution. In addition, although there have been observations of killer whale ( Orcinus orca ) predation on sea otters in Cook Inlet, we did not see behavioral or distributional evidence that it was prevalent enough to have strong effects on sea otter habitat use. Benthic surveys using a remotely operated vehicle (ROV) indicated that epibenthic substrate and biological community heterogeneity differed between areas with and without otters, suggesting that these factors may explain the current distribution of otters within lower Cook Inlet. However, ROV surveys cannot assess infaunal prey abundance, making assessments of the role of prey availability difficult. The existence of a healthy Pacific razor clam ( Siliqua patula ) fishery along western lower Cook Inlet along the Lake Clark coast north of Kamishak Bay suggests there may still be a resource base for eventual expansion of sea otters into this area. Our shore-based forage observations indicated that sea otters exist near carrying capacity densities relative to nearshore prey resources. However, our distribution model suggests the bulk of the population lives offshore beyond our ability to observe their feeding activity. The fact that sea otters are a consistent presence in offshore areas suggests that prey resources in these areas were relatively abundant in comparison to nearshore prey resources, making foraging in offshore areas, with water depths of 0–40 m, energetically profitable. Prey types in these offshore areas of lower Cook Inlet likely included epifauna such as crabs and large urchins, in addition to infaunal clams based on the soft substrate habitat types that characterize lower Cook Inlet. Collectively, our results suggest that sea otters occupy most areas of lower Cook Inlet with appropriate benthic habitat types and prey resources, which includes areas within BOEM Lease Sale blocks. With the exception of the Lake Clark coast, sea otters may be approaching a food- and habitat-limited distribution and carrying capacity, suggesting that the current status of sea otters in lower Cook Inlet is likely to remain similar in the absence of significant changes to prey, habitat, predation, or anthropogenic disturbance.
Alaska↗
Distribution and condition of young-of-year Lost River and shortnose suckers in the Williamson River Delta restoration project and Upper Klamath Lake, Oregon, 2008-10--Final Report
The Nature Conservancy undertook restoration of the Williamson River Delta Preserve with a primary goal "to restore and maintain the diversity of habitats that are essential to the endangered [Lost River sucker ( Deltistes luxatus ) and shortnose sucker ( Chasmistes brevirostris )] while, at the same time, minimizing disturbance and adverse impacts" (David Evans and Associates, 2005). The Western Fisheries Research Center of the U.S. Geological Survey was asked by the Bureau of Reclamation to assist The Nature Conservancy in assessing the use of the restoration by larval and juvenile suckers. We identified five obtainable objectives to gauge the habitat suitability for young-of-year suckers in the permanently flooded portions of the two most recently restored sections (Goose Bay and Tulana) of the Williamson River Delta Preserve (hereafter referred to as the Preserve) and its effects on the distribution and health of larval and juvenile suckers. Several of these objectives were met through collaborations with The Nature Conservancy, Oregon State University, Oregon Water Science Center, and Leetown Science Center. Our findings were in concurrence with those of The Nature Conservancy, who found that the Preserve supported young-of-year suckers at least as well as adjacent lake habitats (Erdman and others, 2011) despite the prevalence of non-native and piscivorous species in the system. The Preserve was recolonized by all fishes in the regional species pool, both native and non-native, between the time each portion of the Preserve (Goose Bay and Tulana) was inundated in autumn and the following spring. A large number of fish capable of preying on endangered larval suckers and a few fish that could prey on juvenile suckers were captured in the Preserve, but these species were no more abundant in the Preserve than in adjacent lakes. Larvae and age-0, age-1, and age-2 juvenile Lost River and shortnose suckers were captured in the Preserve, Upper Klamath Lake, and Agency Lake, indicating that these species reared in restored and unaltered lake habitats. We captured too few larval suckers to examine patterns in spatial or temporal distribution. Once endangered suckers transitioned into juveniles, as defined by morphological development, they continued to disperse from shallow to deep water throughout the Preserve and into adjacent lakes. Age-1 and age-2 suckers captured throughout the Preserve and in adjacent lake habitats, especially in spring, show continued use of restored habitat by these species. Quantitative examination of habitat use by age-0 juvenile suckers that accounted for imperfect detection indicated the portion of habitat used increased throughout July and August each year until the entire study area was used by one or more age-0 juvenile suckers by the end of August. Our rigorous evaluation showed both restored Preserve and unaltered lake habitats were equally used by age-0 juvenile suckers. Although all sampled habitats were used, multi-state occupancy models indicated that more age-0 suckers occupied shallow rather than deep habitats within the range of depths we sampled (0.5–4.3 m). We were unable to compare health and condition of juvenile suckers among habitats, due to their movement among habitats. However, documentation of length-weight relationships, afflictions and deformities, and histology indicated juvenile suckers captured in all habitats maintained a similar level of health among the 3 years of our study.
Oregon↗