DOCSLIB.ORG

2013 Freshwater Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2013 Freshwater Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia United States Office of Water EPA 822-R-18-002 Environmental Protection 4304T April 2013 Agency AQUATIC LIFE AMBIENT WATER QUALITY CRITERIA FOR AMMONIA – FRESHWATER 2013 EPA-822-R-13-001 Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria For Ammonia – Freshwater 2013 April 2013 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water Office of Science and Technology Washington, DC ii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... vi LIST OF APPENDICES ............................................................................................................... vii FOREWORD ............................................................................................................................... viii ACKNOWLEDGMENT................................................................................................................ ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................x ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................... xiii INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ....................................................................................1 PROBLEM FORMULATION.........................................................................................................4 Overview of Stressor Sources and Occurrence ........................................................................... 5 Environmental Fate and Transport of Ammonia in the Aquatic Environment ........................... 6 Mode of Action and Toxicity ...................................................................................................... 8 Assessment Endpoints ................................................................................................................ 9 Measures of Effect .................................................................................................................... 10 Acute measures of effect ....................................................................................................... 11 Chronic measures of effect ................................................................................................... 12 Chronic averaging period of 30 days .................................................................................... 13 Ammonia toxicity data fulfilling minimum data requirements ............................................ 14 Conceptual Model ..................................................................................................................... 16 Conceptual diagram .............................................................................................................. 17 Analysis Plan ............................................................................................................................ 19 EFFECTS ANALYSES FOR FRESHWATER AQUATIC ORGANISMS .................................21 Acute Toxicity to Aquatic Animals .......................................................................................... 21 Summaries of studies used in acute criterion determination................................................. 24 Chronic Toxicity to Freshwater Aquatic Animals .................................................................... 31 Summaries of studies used in chronic criterion determination ............................................. 34 The National Criteria for Ammonia in Fresh Water ................................................................. 40 Acute criterion calculations .................................................................................................. 40 Chronic criterion calculations ............................................................................................... 46 Additional explanation and justification supporting the 2013 temperature and pH-dependent calculations and criteria magnitudes ..................................................................................... 50 Protection of downstream waters .......................................................................................... 51 Considerations for site-specific criteria derivation ............................................................... 52 EFFECTS CHARACTERIZATION .............................................................................................52 Freshwater Acute Toxicity Data ............................................................................................... 53 Acute toxicity data for freshwater mussels and non-pulmonate (gill-bearing) snails........... 53 Freshwater Chronic Toxicity Data ............................................................................................ 56 Use of 28-day juvenile unionid mussel data ......................................................................... 56 28-day toxicity data for freshwater snails ............................................................................. 56 iii 28-day toxicity data for Hyalella azteca: Minimum Data Requirement Number 5 .............. 57 Reconsideration of the chronic toxicity data available for aquatic insects: Minimum Data Requirement Number 6 ......................................................................................................... 59 New chronic toxicity data for salmonid species and derivation of a GMCV for Oncorhynchus: Minimum Data Requirement Number 1 ...................................................... 59 Another order of insect or a phylum not already represented: Minimum Data Requirement Number 8 .............................................................................................................................. 61 Protection of Endangered Species ............................................................................................ 62 Key acute toxicity data for listed species .............................................................................. 62 Key chronic toxicity data for listed species .......................................................................... 64 Comparison of 1999, 2009, and 2013 Criteria Values ............................................................. 65 Comparison of statistical approaches to develop the chronic criterion: EC20 vs. MATC ... 68 UNUSED DATA ...........................................................................................................................68 REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................70 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Summary of Assessment Endpoints and Measures of Effect Used in Criteria Derivation for Ammonia. ...................................................................................................13 Table 2. 1985 Guidelines Minimum Data Requirements Summary Table Reflecting the Number of Species and Genus Level Mean Values Represented in the Acute and Chronic Toxicity Datasets for Ammonia in Freshwater. ...................................................15 Table 3. Ranked Genus Mean Acute Values. ...............................................................................27 Table 4. Ranked Genus Mean Chronic Values. ............................................................................39 Table 5a. Temperature and pH-Dependent Values of the CMC (Acute Criterion Magnitude) – Oncorhynchus spp. Present. ............................................................................................44 Table 5b. Temperature and pH-Dependent Values of the CMC (Acute Criterion Magnitude) – Oncorhynchus spp. Absent. ............................................................................................45 Table 6. Temperature and pH-Dependent Values of the CCC (Chronic Criterion Magnitude). ........................................................................................................................49 Table 7. Comparison of the Four Taxa Used to Calculate the FAV and CMC in the 1999, 2009 Draft and 2013 AWQC. ............................................................................................55 Table 8. Comparison of the Four Taxa Used to Calculate the FCV and CCC in the 1999 Update, 2009 Draft and the 2013 AWQC. .........................................................................67 Table F.1. Species, Genus and Taxon-Specific ACRs for Freshwater Aquatic Animals Exposed to Ammonia .......................................................................................................145 Table M.1. Results of Regression Analysis of logLC50 (mg/L total ammonia nitrogen) Versus Temperature (°C) for Individual Data Sets on the Temperature Dependence of Acute Ammonia Toxicity. ...........................................................................................215 Table M.2. Results of Regression Analysis of log LC50 (mg/L total ammonia nitrogen) Versus Temperature (°C) for Pooled Data Sets on the Temperature Dependence of Acute Ammonia Toxicity to Fish. ...................................................................................216 Table N.1. Temperature and pH-Dependent Values of the CMC (Acute Criterion Magnitude) – Unionid Mussels
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In the Weber River, Utah
    An International Periodical Promoting Conservation and Biodiversity Southwestern United States—Mexico—Central America Una Revista Internacional para Fomentar la Conservación y Biodiversidad El Suroeste de USA—México—Centroamérica STATUS AND STRUCTURE OF TWO POPULATIONS OF THE BLUEHEAD SUCKER (CATOSTOMUS DISCOBOLUS) IN THE WEBER RIVER, UTAH P. A ARON WEBBER,PAUL D. THOMPSON,* AND PHAEDRA BUDY Colorado River Fishery Project, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 1380 South 2350 West, Vernal, UT 84078 (PAW) Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 515 East 5300 South, Ogden, UT 84405 (PDT) United States Geological Survey, Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Watershed Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT 8432 (PB) * Correspondent: [email protected] THE SOUTHWESTERN NATURALIST 57(3): 267–276 SEPTEMBER 2012 STATUS AND STRUCTURE OF TWO POPULATIONS OF THE BLUEHEAD SUCKER (CATOSTOMUS DISCOBOLUS) IN THE WEBER RIVER, UTAH P. A ARON WEBBER,PAUL D. THOMPSON,* AND PHAEDRA BUDY Colorado River Fishery Project, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 1380 South 2350 West, Vernal, UT 84078 (PAW) Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 515 East 5300 South, Ogden, UT 84405 (PDT) United States Geological Survey, Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Watershed Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT 8432 (PB) * Correspondent: [email protected] ABSTRACT—We compared two populations of the bluehead sucker (Catostomus discobolus) during 2007–2009 in the Weber River, Davis, Summit, and Weber counties, Utah. We estimated 225 and 546 individuals in these populations. Based on recaptured, PIT-tagged fish, annual survival of adults (202–575 mm total length) was high (77%); however, our top model indicated mortality increased with size (i.e., senescence).
    [Show full text]
  • North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Gordon Myers, Executive Director
    North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Gordon Myers, Executive Director March 1, 2016 Honorable Jimmy Dixon Honorable Chuck McGrady N.C. House of Representatives N.C. House of Representatives 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 416B 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 304 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Senator Trudy Wade N.C. Senate 300 N. Salisbury Street, Room 521 Raleigh, NC 27603-5925 Dear Honorables: I am submitting this report to the Environmental Review Committee in fulfillment of the requirements of Section 4.33 of Session Law 2015-286 (H765). As directed, this report includes a review of methods and criteria used by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission on the State protected animal list as defined in G.S. 113-331 and compares them to federal and state agencies in the region. This report also reviews North Carolina policies specific to introduced species along with determining recommendations for improvements to these policies among state and federally listed species as well as nonlisted animals. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact me by phone at (919) 707-0151 or via email at [email protected]. Sincerely, Gordon Myers Executive Director North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Report on Study Conducted Pursuant to S.L. 2015-286 To the Environmental Review Commission March 1, 2016 Section 4.33 of Session Law 2015-286 (H765) directed the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) to “review the methods and criteria by which it adds, removes, or changes the status of animals on the state protected animal list as defined in G.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Edna Assay Development
    Environmental DNA assays available for species detection via qPCR analysis at the U.S.D.A Forest Service National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation (NGC). Asterisks indicate the assay was designed at the NGC. This list was last updated in June 2021 and is subject to change. Please contact [email protected] with questions. Family Species Common name Ready for use? Mustelidae Martes americana, Martes caurina American and Pacific marten* Y Castoridae Castor canadensis American beaver Y Ranidae Lithobates catesbeianus American bullfrog Y Cinclidae Cinclus mexicanus American dipper* N Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American eel Y Soricidae Sorex palustris American water shrew* N Salmonidae Oncorhynchus clarkii ssp Any cutthroat trout* N Petromyzontidae Lampetra spp. Any Lampetra* Y Salmonidae Salmonidae Any salmonid* Y Cottidae Cottidae Any sculpin* Y Salmonidae Thymallus arcticus Arctic grayling* Y Cyrenidae Corbicula fluminea Asian clam* N Salmonidae Salmo salar Atlantic Salmon Y Lymnaeidae Radix auricularia Big-eared radix* N Cyprinidae Mylopharyngodon piceus Black carp N Ictaluridae Ameiurus melas Black Bullhead* N Catostomidae Cycleptus elongatus Blue Sucker* N Cichlidae Oreochromis aureus Blue tilapia* N Catostomidae Catostomus discobolus Bluehead sucker* N Catostomidae Catostomus virescens Bluehead sucker* Y Felidae Lynx rufus Bobcat* Y Hylidae Pseudocris maculata Boreal chorus frog N Hydrocharitaceae Egeria densa Brazilian elodea N Salmonidae Salvelinus fontinalis Brook trout* Y Colubridae Boiga irregularis Brown tree snake*
    [Show full text]
  • Operation of Flaming Gorge Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement
    Record of Decision Operation of Flaming Gorge Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement I. Summary of Action and Background The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) has completed a final environmental impact statement (EIS) on the operation of Flaming Gorge Dam. The EIS describes the potential effects of modifying the operation of Flaming Gorge Dam to assist in the recovery of four endangered fish, and their critical habitat, downstream from the dam. The four endangered fish species are Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius), humpback chub (Gila cypha), razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus), and bonytail (Gila elegans). Reclamation would implement the proposed action by modifying the operations of Flaming Gorge Dam, to the extent possible, to achieve the flows and temperatures recommended by participants of the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program (Recovery Program). Reclamation’s goal is to implement the proposed action and, at the same time, maintain and continue all authorized purposes of the Colorado River Storage Project. The purpose of the proposed action is to operate Flaming Gorge Dam to protect and assist in recovery of the populations and designated critical habitat of the four endangered fishes, while maintaining all authorized purposes of the Flaming Gorge Unit of the Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP), including those related to the development of water resources in accordance with the Colorado River Compact. As the Federal agency responsible for the operation of Flaming Gorge Dam, Reclamation was the lead agency in preparing the EIS. Eight cooperating agencies also participated in preparing this EIS: the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, State of Utah Department of Natural Resources, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Status of Humpback Chub, Gila Cypha, and Catch
    Population Status of Humpback Chub, Gila cypha, and Catch Indices and Population Structure of Sympatric Roundtail Chub, Gila robusta, in Black Rocks, Colorado River, Colorado, 1998- 2012 Picture 1. Humpback chub on grid board (2012). Photo credit: T. Francis, USFWS. Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program Project Number 131 (22a3) Final Report April, 2016 Travis A. Francis U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Colorado River Fishery Project 445 West Gunnison Avenue, Suite 140 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 -and- Dr. Kevin R. Bestgen Dr. Gary C. White Colorado State University Larval Fish Laboratory Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 i Suggested Citation: Francis, T.A., K.R. Bestgen, and G.C. White. 2016. Population status of humpback chub, Gila cypha, and catch indices and population structure of sympatric roundtail chub, Gila robusta, in Black Rocks, Colorado River, Colorado, 1998-2012. Larval Fish Laboratory Contribution 199. Final Report from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program, Project Number 131. Grand Junction, Colorado. ii Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... vii INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Three-Species Investigations Kevin Thompson Aquatic Research
    Three-Species Investigations Kevin Thompson Aquatic Research Scientist Job Progress Report Colorado Parks & Wildlife Aquatic Research Section Fort Collins, Colorado May 2017 STATE OF COLORADO John W. Hickenlooper, Governor COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Bob Randall, Executive Director COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE Bob Broscheid, Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION Chris Castilian, Chair Robert William Bray Jeanne Horne, Vice-Chair John V. Howard, Jr. James C. Pribyl, Secretary James Vigil William G. Kane Dale E. Pizil Robert “Dean” Wingfield Michelle Zimmerman Alexander Zipp Ex Officio/Non-Voting Members: Don Brown, Bob Randall and Bob Broscheid AQUATIC RESEARCH STAFF George J. Schisler, Aquatic Research Leader Kelly Carlson, Aquatic Research Program Assistant Peter Cadmus, Aquatic Research Scientist/Toxicologist, Water Pollution Studies Eric R. Fetherman, Aquatic Research Scientist, Salmonid Disease Studies Ryan Fitzpatrick, Aquatic Research Scientist, Eastern Plains Native Fishes Eric E. Richer, Aquatic Research Scientist/Hydrologist, Stream Habitat Restoration Matthew C. Kondratieff, Aquatic Research Scientist, Stream Habitat Restoration Dan Kowalski, Aquatic Research Scientist, Stream & River Ecology Adam Hansen, Aquatic Research Scientist, Coldwater Lakes and Reservoirs Kevin B. Rogers, Aquatic Research Scientist, Colorado Cutthroat Studies Kevin G. Thompson, Aquatic Research Scientist, 3-Species and Boreal Toad Studies Andrew J. Treble, Aquatic Research Scientist, Aquatic Data Management and Analysis Brad Neuschwanger, Hatchery Manager,
    [Show full text]
  • Crustacea-Arthropoda) Fauna of Sinop and Samsun and Their Ecology
    J. Black Sea/Mediterranean Environment Vol. 15: 47- 60 (2009) Freshwater and brackish water Malacostraca (Crustacea-Arthropoda) fauna of Sinop and Samsun and their ecology Sinop ve Samsun illeri tatlısu ve acısu Malacostraca (Crustacea-Arthropoda) faunası ve ekolojileri Mehmet Akbulut1*, M. Ruşen Ustaoğlu2, Ekrem Şanver Çelik1 1 Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Fisheries Faculty, Çanakkale-Turkey 2 Ege University, Fisheries Faculty, Izmir-Turkey Abstract Malacostraca fauna collected from freshwater and brackishwater in Sinop and Samsun were studied from 181 stations between February 1999 and September 2000. 19 species and 4 subspecies belonging to 15 genuses were found in 134 stations. In total, 23 taxon were found: 11 Amphipoda, 6 Decapoda, 4 Isopoda, and 2 Mysidacea. Limnomysis benedeni is the first time in Turkish Mysidacea fauna. In this work at the first time recorded group are Gammarus pulex pulex, Gammarus aequicauda, Gammarus uludagi, Gammarus komareki, Gammarus longipedis, Gammarus balcanicus, Echinogammarus ischnus, Orchestia stephenseni Paramysis kosswigi, Idotea baltica basteri, Idotea hectica, Sphaeroma serratum, Palaemon adspersus, Crangon crangon, Potamon ibericum tauricum and Carcinus aestuarii in the studied area. Potamon ibericum tauricum is the most encountered and widespread species. Key words: Freshwater, brackish water, Malacostraca, Sinop, Samsun, Turkey Introduction The Malacostraca is the largest subgroup of crustaceans and includes the decapods such as crabs, mole crabs, lobsters, true shrimps and the stomatopods or mantis shrimps. There are more than 22,000 taxa in this group representing two third of all crustacean species and contains all the larger forms. *Corresponding author: [email protected] 47 Malacostracans play an important role in aquatic ecosystems and therefore their conservation is important.
    [Show full text]
  • Information on the NCWRC's Scientific Council of Fishes Rare
    A Summary of the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina Submitted by Bryn H. Tracy North Carolina Division of Water Resources North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC On behalf of the NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes November 01, 2014 Bigeye Jumprock, Scartomyzon (Moxostoma) ariommum, State Threatened Photograph by Noel Burkhead and Robert Jenkins, courtesy of the Virginia Division of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Southeastern Fishes Council (http://www.sefishescouncil.org/). Table of Contents Page Introduction......................................................................................................................................... 3 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes In North Carolina ........... 4 Summaries from the 2010 Reevaluation of Status Listings for Jeopardized Freshwater Fishes in North Carolina .......................................................................................................................... 12 Recent Activities of NCWRC’s Scientific Council of Fishes .................................................. 13 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part I, Ohio Lamprey .............................................. 14 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part II, “Atlantic” Highfin Carpsucker ...................... 17 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part III, Tennessee Darter ...................................... 20 North Carolina’s Imperiled Fish Fauna, Part
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Influence of Intraspecific Competition and Effects on Intermediate Host
    Dianne et al. Parasites & Vectors 2012, 5:166 http://www.parasitesandvectors.com/content/5/1/166 RESEARCH Open Access Larval size in acanthocephalan parasites: Influence of intraspecific competition and effects on intermediate host behavioural changes Lucile Dianne1*, Loïc Bollache1, Clément Lagrue1,2, Nathalie Franceschi1 and Thierry Rigaud1 Abstract Background: Parasites often face a trade-off between exploitation of host resources and transmission probabilities to the next host. In helminths, larval growth, a major component of adult parasite fitness, is linked to exploitation of intermediate host resources and is influenced by the presence of co-infecting conspecifics. In manipulative parasites, larval growth strategy could also interact with their ability to alter intermediate host phenotype and influence parasite transmission. Methods: We used experimental infections of Gammarus pulex by Pomphorhynchus laevis (Acanthocephala), to investigate larval size effects on host behavioural manipulation among different parasite sibships and various degrees of intra-host competition. Results: Intra-host competition reduced mean P. laevis cystacanth size, but the largest cystacanth within a host always reached the same size. Therefore, all co-infecting parasites did not equally suffer from intraspecific competition. Under no intra-host competition (1 parasite per host), larval size was positively correlated with host phototaxis. At higher infection intensities, this relationship disappeared, possibly because of strong competition for host resources,
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes As a Template for Reticulate Evolution
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 12-2016 Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America Max Russell Bangs University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Evolution Commons, Molecular Biology Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Bangs, Max Russell, "Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America" (2016). Theses and Dissertations. 1847. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1847 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Biology by Max Russell Bangs University of South Carolina Bachelor of Science in Biological Sciences, 2009 University of South Carolina Master of Science in Integrative Biology, 2011 December 2016 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. _____________________________________ Dr. Michael E. Douglas Dissertation Director _____________________________________ ____________________________________ Dr. Marlis R. Douglas Dr. Andrew J. Alverson Dissertation Co-Director Committee Member _____________________________________ Dr. Thomas F. Turner Ex-Officio Member Abstract Hybridization is neither simplistic nor phylogenetically constrained, and post hoc introgression can have profound evolutionary effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Fish Strategy
    MURRAY-DARLING BASIN AUTHORITY Native Fish Strategy Mesoscale movements of small- and medium-sized fish in the Murray-Darling Basin MURRAY-DARLING BASIN AUTHORITY Native Fish Strategy Mesoscale movements of small- and medium-sized fish in the Murray-Darling Basin M. Hutchison, A. Butcher, J. Kirkwood, D. Mayer, K. Chilcott and S. Backhouse Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries Published by Murray-Darling Basin Commission Postal Address GPO Box 409, Canberra ACT 2601 Office location Level 4, 51 Allara Street, Canberra City Australian Capital Territory Telephone (02) 6279 0100 international + 61 2 6279 0100 Facsimile (02) 6248 8053 international + 61 2 6248 8053 Email [email protected] Internet http://www.mdbc.gov.au For further information contact the Murray-Darling Basin Commission office on (02) 6279 0100 This report may be cited as: Hutchison, M, Butcher, A, Kirkwood, J, Mayer, D, Chikott, K and Backhouse, S. Mesoscale movements of small and medium-sized fish in the Murray-Darling Basin MDBC Publication No. 41/08 ISBN 978 1 921257 81 0 © Copyright Murray-Darling Basin Commission 2008 This work is copyright. Graphical and textual information in the work (with the exception of photographs and the MDBC logo) may be stored, retrieved and reproduced in whole or in part, provided the information is not sold or used for commercial benefit and is acknowledged. Such reproduction includes fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968. Reproduction for other purposes is prohibited without prior permission of the Murray-Darling Basin Commission or the individual photographers and artists with whom copyright applies.
    [Show full text]