Vol 33 no 10 October 2008

Fish News Legislative Update Journal Highlights FisheriesAmerican Fisheries Society • www.fisheries.org Calendar Job Center

Ohio’s 2006 Lake Erie Charter Industry Closure “Windows” Scheduling: Is It an Effective Subsistence Management Tool? Climate Change, Ecosystem Impacts, and Management for Pacific Salmon Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 477 A Winning Combination

Dr. Brennan releases hatchery snook into Florida’s estuarine streams to evaluate the stocking program. The juveniles are tagged with Coded Wire Tags (CWT) that are detected electronically, and with Visible Implant Elastomer (VIE) tags in the caudal fin (below)2. Recovery of the CWT will provide detailed information about the release group, while the elastomer tag designates the hatchery origin of the fish. Wild snook were tagged with color coded VIE tags to designate the stream of origin.

Photos courtesy of N. Brennan.

Before tagging, it is critical to evaluate the study sustainable levels. Dr. Brennan’s research focuses objectives, the animals involved, and the methods on evaluating whether releasing juvenile hatchery of recovering or detecting tags. We enjoy helping fish would supplement or displace wild juveniles. our customers select the right type of tag for their After estimating the pre-release abundance of wild research, and sometimes, a combination of tags, juvenile snook, they stocked hatchery juveniles at simultaneously or over time, is the best solution. high and low densities into estuarine creeks. Research programs tend to be stronger if they don’t Dr. Brennan et al. found little movement of depend on any one tag type but use the strengths stocked or wild snook between streams. They also of different tags to address a range of questions. concluded that the experimental releases of high Dr. Nathan Brennan and fellow researchers at densities of juvenile hatchery-reared snook did Florida’s Mote Marine Lab demonstrated how tags increase total abundance of juveniles without can be effectively combined1. Common snook suppressing the density of wild snook. This research (Centropomus undecimalis) are valued as one of is an important step in understanding the dynamics the top marine sport fishes in Florida. Despite of enhancing Florida’s snook populations. restrictive fishing regulations, they are considered 1Brennan, N. P., et al. (2008). Rev. Fish. Sci. 16: 215-227. overfished. Managers are investigating the potential 2Brennan, N. P. et al. (2005). N. Amer. J. Fish. Manage. 25: 437-445. of stock enhancement to help snook recover to

Northwest Marine Technology, Inc. www.nmt.us Shaw Island, Washington, USA

Northwest Marine Technology, Inc. Corporate Office Biological Services 360.468.3375 [email protected] 360.596.9400 [email protected] 478 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g vol 33 no 10 October 2008 Contents COLUMN: AmericFisheriesan Fisheries Society • www.fisheries.org 480 PRESIDENT’S HOOK editorial / subscription / circulation offices Philosophical Ramblings of a New 5410 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110 • Bethesda, MD 20814-2199 President. 301/897-8616 • fax 301/897-8096 • [email protected] The American Fisheries Society (AFS), founded in 1870, AFS's diversity, in disciplines, ethnicity, is the oldest and largest professional society representing demographics, and nationalities, is what fisheries scientists. The AFS promotes scientific research contributes to the collective intellectual capacity and enlightened management of aquatic resources that is the real power in our Society, the power for optimum use and enjoyment by the public. It also encourages comprehensive education of fisheries scientists of our collective knowledge. and continuing on-the-job training. William G. Franzin

AFS FISHERIES Editors OFFICERS STAFF News: President Senior Editor Science Editors 481 Fisheries Madeleine William G. Franzin Ghassan “Gus” N. Journal Highlights: President Elect Rassam Hall-Arber Donald C. Jackson Director of Ken Ashley First Publications Doug Beard 482 Transactions of the Vice President Aaron Lerner Ken Currens American Fisheries Society Wayne A. Hubert Managing William E. Kelso 485 Second Editor Deirdre M. Kimball Update: Vice President Beth Beard Robert T. Lackey William L. Fisher Dennis Lassuy Production 484 Legislation and Past President Allen Rutherford Editor Policy Mary C. Fabrizio Book Review Cherie Worth Executive Editors Elden Hawkes, Jr. Perspective: Director Francis Juanes 502 Fisheries Ghassan “Gus” N. Ben Letcher Rassam Keith Nislow Management 485 Climate Change, Ecosystem Impacts, and Dues and fees for 2008 are $76 in North America Management for Pacific Salmon ($88 elsewhere) for regular members, $19 in North America ($22 elsewhere) for student members, and $38 Policy developed to sustain and conserve ($44) retired members. Fees include $19 for Fisheries Pacific salmon with ongoing climate change subscription. Nonmember and library subscription rates is needed at regional to North Pacific-wide are $106 ($127). Price per copy: $3.50 member; $6 nonmember. Fisheries (ISSN 0363-2415) is published scales. monthly by the American Fisheries Society; 5410 Daniel E. Schindler, Xan Augerot, Erica Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110; Bethesda, MD 20814-2199 Fleishman, Nathan J. Mantua, Brian Riddell, ©copyright 2008. Periodicals postage paid at Bethesda, Mary Ruckelshaus, Jim Seeb, and Michael Maryland, and at an additional mailing office. A copy of Fisheries Guide for Authors is available from the editor or Webster the AFS website, www.fisheries.org. If requesting from the managing editor, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed envelope with your request. Republication or systematic Feature: Column: or multiple reproduction of material in this publication is permitted only under consent or license from the 485 Socioeconomics 507 Director's line American Fisheries Society. Postmaster: Send address Ohio's 2006 Lake Erie Charter Fishing Reconsider Changes to ESA changes to Fisheries, American Fisheries Society; 5410 Industry The AFS urges the Department of Interior to Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110; Bethesda, MD 20814-2199. Captains from the Great Lakes’ largest charter reconsider proposed changes and to keep the independent review system intact. Fisheries is printed on 10% post-consumer fleet respond to the sixth Ohio Sea Grant recycled paper with soy-based printing inks. socioeconomic survey of Ohio’s Lake Erie Gus Rassam charter industry. Frank R. Lichtkoppler, Fred L. Snyder, and AWARDS: 508 AFS 2008 AWARD Advertising Index 495 WInners CALENDAR: EcoAnalysts ...... 507 Ecotrust 516 516 FISHERIES EVENTS Emperor Aquatics, Inc...... 523 Floy Tag 515 Obituary: Frigid Units, Inc. 487 518 Rich Cailteux Halltech Aquatic Research, Inc. . . . 481 AFS Annual Meeting: Hydroacoustic Technology, Inc. . . . 528 520 2nd Call for Papers Little River Research and Design 518 Kelly E. Riesen Lotek Wireless 522 Publications: Feature: Myriax ...... 523 522 New Titles Northwest Marine Technology, Inc. . 478 495 Fisheries O. S. Systems ...... 523 Management Announcements: Sonotronics ...... 505 Fishery Closure "Windows" Scheduling as 524 Job Center a Means of Changing the Texas Chapter AFS and Texas Parks and Subsistence Fishery Pattern: Is It an Effective Wildlife Department ...... 517 Managment Tool? Vemco (A Division of Amirix) . . . . 491 The author presents the results whether a Vemco (A Division of Amirix) . . . . 493 regulation, “windows,” was an effective tool for management of subsistence fishery for the Tell advertisers you found them through people of Bethel, Kuskokwim River, Alaska. Cover: Charter row. Fisheries! Toshihide Hamazaki Credit: Frank Lichtkoppler Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 479 William G. Franzin COLUMN: AFS President Franzin can PRESIDENT’S HOOK be contacted at franzin@ shaw.ca.

Philosophical Ramblings of a New President.

Although we are in name the spread all over the globe. Our object- opportunities for the rest of the world “American Fisheries Society,” our ives above are truly global and so is to learn about AFS. The better job we Society has a much broader mandate AFS. This is the diversity in our Society do at disseminating knowledge-based than just the United States. The object- that enriches us as an organization, a products, the more we will grow. Lest ives in our Constitution exhort us to: diversity that we should be proud to there be some mistake, I don’t mean embrace. just growth in numbers, although for a A. Promote the conservation, develop- We also should be genuinely proud society to prosper growth in numbers ment, and wise use of the fisheries; of the professional diversity in AFS. doesn’t hurt. But as you have heard time B. Promote and evaluate the devel- Most professional societies are discipline and again from our executive director, opment and advancement of all oriented; geologists, physicists, chemists, Gus Rassam, we don’t prosper on the branches of and etc. AFS is different—we have whole backs of our members’ dues. We grow practice; Sections proclaiming to be economists, and prosper by selling our knowledge- C. Gather and disseminate to Society bioengineers, physiologists, geneticists, based products. To grow in CIC, we need members and the general pub- administrators, information technolo- to continue to improve and increase lic scientific, technical, and other gists, fish culturists, educators, man- our knowledge-based products and our information about fisheries science agers, lawyers, and historians. Then there influence in the scientific arena. and practice through publications, are the many cross-disciplinary members We have begun this quest to grow meetings, and other forms of com- who support Sections devoted to particu- in production of knowledge-based munication; and lar resource issues like introduced fishes, products by virtue of the New Initiatives D. Encourage the teaching of fisheries water quality, marine fisheries, early life program begun in Jennifer Nielsen’s science and practice in colleges and history, Canadian aquatic resources, estu- term and developed into reality during universities and the continuing edu- aries, fish health, native peoples fisheries, Mary Fabrizio’s term. We have a new cation and development of fisheries and international fisheries. But wait, state-of-the-art online journal coming professionals. there is one more section that doesn’t fit on-stream this winter and we have a You will notice there is no mention into these kinds of categories: the Equal staff policy and outreach coordinator of borders in these objectives; they Opportunities Section. This unique sec- to help make our scientific products are universal to our members and our tion is devoted to the concept of diversity available to a wider audience. We will science regardless of the country from in our Society—diversity of opportunity develop secondary knowledge products which our members come. This inclu- equally for all interested in fisheries as aimed at politicians and their aids, and sivity of AFS is what draws to it the a profession. Fisheries professionals are the general public. We are getting a high broad membership that we have. For united under this umbrella of equality, journal impact factor recognizing the example, we have members in over 50 pursuing the science and management excellence of our house journal Fisheries. countries and there are several hun- of all aspects of fisheries. This means we are doing some things dred members in Canada, where I live. This diversity of AFS, in disciplines, right but we need to do more. Both Like AFS, my family is typical of many ethnicity, demographics, and national- knowledge-based products and broader on this continent; my wife is from ities, is what contributes to the collective influence will be generated by having the United States but she has lived in intellectual capacity (CIC) that is the topic-oriented meetings sponsored both Canada most of her life. A couple of real power in our Society, the power within the Society among Units but also my aunts and great aunts were born of our collective knowledge. Sir Francis external to the Society by co-sponsoring in and lived in the United States all Bacon said that “knowledge is power.” symposia with other fisheries societies. their lives. I am sure this is equally Knowledge is our stock in trade, what The growing World Council of Fisheries true for families between the United we bring to bear on problems facing Societies, of which AFS is the secretar- States and Mexico. The more mem- the profession and fisheries around iat, provides a great opportunity for us bers of our Society I meet and learn North America and in the world fisheries to grow globally in influence and in pro- about, the more I realize that we are community. We mainly disseminate duction of books and special symposia. an American society in the more global knowledge through journals, books, We must seize these opportunities if we sense both within and outside AFS, a educational workshops and courses, and wish to continue to prosper. Our future truly hemispheric society, but like our by having really great conferences that has never been better than it is now. own families we also have members attract new members to us and provide Carpe diem! b

480 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g News: Fisheries

New questions about Columbia River that cuts salmon survival to that of a heav- dams ily dammed river, or whether factors other In the October 28 issue of the open- than dams play a larger, unsuspected role access journal PLoS Biology, Canadian in salmon survival.” and U.S. researchers discovered that some and videos, and save favorite hotspots an endangered Pacific salmon stocks are New Fishington social network site interactive map tool. RBFF stakeholders can surviving in rivers with hydroelectric dams The Recreational Boating and Fishing also use Fishington to create profiles and as well as or better than in rivers without Foundation (RBFF) announced the launch connect with other local businesses, clubs, dams. The team compared the survival of Fishington—a new online commu- and individuals for their own promotional rates of out-migrating, juvenile spring nity tailored specifically to boaters and efforts. Chinook and steelhead salmon from two anglers. Fishington, which is hosted on the river basins: the heavily dammed Snake TakeMeFishing.org web site and also found 2009–2010 Janice Lee Fenske and Columbia rivers and the free-flowing at Fishington.com, allows members to Fellowship Thompson and Fraser rivers, both critical send messages to each other, share boat- The Department of Fisheries and spawning grounds for numerous salmon ing and fishing photos, make comments Wildlife at Michigan State University species. Electronically tagged smolts were on their favorite boating and fishing spots, (MSU) is accepting applications for the monitored their journey from freshwater and much more. 2009–2010 Janice Lee Fenske Excellence into the ocean via a large-scale acoustic According to research from media com- in Fellowship. telemetry system called the Pacific Ocean munications agency Universal McCann, Graduate students accepted to Fisheries Shelf Tracking (POST) array. 57% of people on the World Wide and Wildlife at MSU can apply, and a single “It came as quite a surprise to us that Web have joined a social network. And recipient will receive an award of $10,000. the Fraser River salmon populations studied according to Southwick Associates, 34% The recipient will also work with a univer- have lower survival than the Columbia of anglers stated that web sites are their sity mentor and a mentor from a state or River study populations,” said co-author primary source of fishing information and federal fisheries management agency to Erin Rechisky, a Ph.D. candidate at the entertainment in 2008, up from 24% in address a practical issue facing the agency. University of British Columbia. However, 2007. Fishington allows members to create More information on the award and Rechisky noted, “Clearly dams are not a profile, find and add friends, create and application process can be found at www. good for salmon. What is unclear is join groups, create and post comments on fw.msu.edu/fellowships.htm. b whether the Fraser River has a problem message boards, add and share photos

Halltech Aquatic Research, Inc.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 481 Volume 137 Journal Highlights: Issue 5 Transactions of the September 2008 American Fisheries Society

To subscribe to AFS journals go to www.fisheries.org and click on Publications/Journals.

Estimating Recent Growth Rates of Carbon. Ignacio Serrano, Ishi Buffam, Daniel Breeding Success of Wild and First- Atlantic Salmon Smolts Using RNA–DNA Palm, Eva Brännäs, and Hjalmar Laudon, pages Generation Hatchery Female Spring Ratios from Nonlethally Sampled Tissues. 1363-1377. Chinook Salmon Spawning in an Artificial Sharon A. MacLean, Elaine M. Caldarone, and Stream. Steven L. Schroder, Curtis M. Jeanne M. St. Onge-Burns, pages 1279-1284. [Note] Differential Gene Expression Knudsen, Todd N. Pearsons, Todd W. Kassler, between Fall- and Spring-Run Chinook Sewall F. Young, Craig A. Busack, and David E. [Note] The Effect of Yakima River Spring Salmon Assessed by Long Serial Analysis Fast, pages 1475-1489. Chinook Salmon Sire Life History Type on of Gene Expression. Jeremiah C. Bernier, Emergence Timing and Size of Progeny. Shanda R. Birkeland, Michael J. Cipriano, Effects of Salinity, Temperature, and Brian R. Beckman, Brad Gadberry, Paul Parkins, Andrew G. McArthur, and Michael A. Banks, Weight on the Survival of Young-of-Year and Donald A. Larsen, pages 1285-1291. pages 1378-1388. Shortnose Sturgeon. Jeffrey R. Ziegeweid, [Note] Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms Comparison of Reef Fish Catch per Unit Cecil A. Jennings, Douglas L. Peterson, and Associated with Allozyme Differences Effort and Total Mortality between the Marsha C. Black, pages 1490-1499. between Inland and Coastal Rainbow 1970s and 2005–2006 in Onslow Bay, Trout. Joseph P. Brunelli, Gary H. Thorgaard, North Carolina. Paul J. Rudershausen, Erik H. Allocation of Sampling Effort to Robb F. Leary, and James L. Dunnigan, pages Williams, Jeffrey A. Buckel, Jennifer C. Potts, Optimize Efficiency of Watershed-Level 1292-1298. and Charles S. Manooch III, pages 1389-1405. Ichthyofaunal Inventories. Katherine L. Smith and Michael L. Jones, pages 1500-1506. Interannual and Spatial Feeding Patterns Comparisons between Consumption of Hatchery and Wild Juvenile Pink Estimates from Bioenergetics Simulations Survival Comparison of Spring Chinook Salmon in the Gulf of Alaska in Years of and Field Measurements for Salmon Reared in a Production Hatchery Low and High Survival. Janet L. Armstrong, from Oneida Lake, New York. Brian F. under Optimum Conventional and Katherine W. Myers, David A. Beauchamp, Lantry, Lars G. Rudstam, John L. Forney, Seminatural Conditions. David E. Fast, Nancy D. Davis, Robert V. Walker, Jennifer L. Anthony J. VanDeValk, Edward L. Mills, Donald Douglas Neeley, David T. Lind, Mark V. Boldt, John J. Piccolo, Lewis J. Haldorson, and J. Stewart, and Jean V. , pages 1406- Johnston, Charles R. Strom, William J. Bosch, Jamal H. Moss, pages 1299-1316. 1421. Curtis M. Knudsen, Steve L. Schroder, and Bruce D. Watson, pages 1507-1518. Concentrations of Saxitoxin and An Age-Dependent Tag Return Model for Tetrodotoxin in Three Species of Puffers Estimating Mortality and Selectivity of an Reliability of Bioelectrical Impedance from the Indian River Lagoon, Florida, the Estuarine-Dependent Fish with High Rates Analysis for Estimating Whole-Fish Energy of . Nathan M. Bacheler, Location for Multiple Cases of Saxitoxin Density and Percent Lipids. Steven A. Joseph E. Hightower, Lee M. Paramore, Jeffrey Puffer Poisoning from 2002 to 2004. Pothoven, Stuart A. Ludsin, Tomas O. Höök, Jonathan R. Deeds, Kevin D. White, Stacey A. Buckel, and Kenneth H. Pollock, pages David L. Fanslow, Doran M. Mason, Paris D. M. Etheridge, and Jan H. Landsberg, pages 1422-1432. Collingsworth, and Jason J. Van Tassell, pages 1317-1326. Comparison of Female Reproductive Traits 1519-1529. [Note] Genetic Effective Size in Populations and Progeny of First-Generation Hatchery of Hatchery-Raised Red Drum Released and Wild Upper Yakima River Spring Movement of Reservoir-Stocked Riverine for Stock Enhancement. John R. Gold, Liang Chinook Salmon. Curtis M. Knudsen, Steve Fish between Tailwaters and Rivers. Jeffrey Ma, Eric Saillant, Paul S. Silva, and R. R. Vega, L. Schroder, Craig Busack, Mark V. Johnston, A. Spoelstra, Roy A. Stein, J. Andrew Royle, pages 1327-1334. Todd N. Pearsons, and Charles R. Strom, pages and Elizabeth A. Marschall, pages 1530-1542. 1433-1445. Distribution of Genetically Differentiated Spatial and Temporal Variability in Size at Splittail Populations during the Patterns of Ultraviolet Radiation Exposure Maturity of Pollock in the Eastern Nonspawning Season. Melinda R. Baerwald, in Bluegill Nests over the Course of the Bering Sea. Jennifer P. Stahl and Gordon H. Frederick Feyrer, and Bernie May, pages 1335- Spawning Season. Mark H. Olson, Tristan Kruse, pages 1543-1557. 1345. Adams-Deutsch, Kelly J. Cassels, Amy E. Oliver, and David L. Mitchell, pages 1446-1454. Latitudinal Variation in Physiological and Depth Distribution Dynamics of the Behavioral Responses of Nest-Guarding Sculpin Community in Lake Michigan. [Note] Distribution and Use of Shallow- Smallmouth Bass to Common Recreational Charles P. Madenjian and David B. Bunnell, Water Habitats by Pacific Sand Lances in Practices. Kyle C. Hanson, Marie- pages 1346-1357. Southeastern Alaska. Scott W. Johnson, Ange Gravel, Tara Redpath, Steven J. Cooke, John F. Thedinga, and Kristen M. Munk, pages and Michael J. Siepker, pages 1558-1566. [Note] Boat ElectrofishingR elative to 1455-1463. Anode Arrangement. L. E. Miranda and M. [Book Reviews] Flatfishes: Biology and Kratochvíl, pages 1358-1362. Field Estimation of a Lethal Oxythermal Niche Boundary for Adult Ciscoes in Exploitation, Analysis and Interpretation Thresholds for Survival of Brown Trout Minnesota Lakes. Peter C. Jacobson, Thomas of Freshwater Fisheries Data, and during the Spring Flood Acid Pulse S. Jones, Pat Rivers, and Donald L. Pereira, Communication in Fishes, pages 1567- in Streams High in Dissolved Organic pages 1464-1474. 1570. b

482 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Take advantage of this opportunity. Give back to your local community. Contribute to diversity in the fisheries professions!

AFS Hutton Junior Fisheries Biology Program

Students selected for Mentors are Sponsors of the the Hutton Program participate allowed and encouraged to 2008 Hutton Program in a hands-on, 8-week summer co-mentor with other fisheries provided generous financial mentoring experience in professionals in the same or support to make the eighth fisheries science. Each student other host organizations, in summer program possible. is matched with a local fisheries order to give students a broad • Arkansas Game and professional and awarded a view of the many dimensions Fish Commission $3,000 scholarship. Students of fisheries science. • NOAA Fisheries can participate in a wide We welcome mentor • Northwest Marine variety of activities, including: applicants from municipal, Technologies • stream sampling state, federal, provincial, • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service tribal, university, private, and • seining • wisconsin Department of nongovernmental facilities in Natural Resources • ecosystem restoration all states, commonwealths, • electrofishing and territories of the U.S., AFS Divisions, Chapters, Canada, and Mexico. and Sections • fish tagging and tracking • North Central Division • laboratory analyses of fish Since the Hutton pairs students with mentors within a • Northeastern Division • public education reasonable commuting distance, • western Division • angler surveys we strongly encourage • alaska Chapter • Michigan Chapter • and much more! mentor applicants to recruit qualified student applicants • Minnesota Chapter from their local high schools. • Montana Chapter • North Carolina Chapter Application deadline: Mentor and student applications due • wisconsin Chapter 15 February 2009. • education Section More information: Applications and more information available • and many individual online at www.fisheries.org. members. Select “HuttonProgram” at the top of the page. Questions or Please contact the Hutton Program Coordinator recruitment at [email protected] Fisheriesmaterials: • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t oor b e r301/897-8616 2008 • w w w .f x213. i s h e r i e s .o r g 483 UpdATE: Elden Hawkes, Jr. LEgISLATION AND POLICy aFs Policy Coordinator Hawkes can be contacted at ehawkes@fi sheries.org.

sea grant reauthorization security,” said Ramon Macaraig, presi- strict regulations under both the pro- On 26 September 2008, the Senate dent of the Chamber of vincial and federal government. passed H.R. 5618, the National Sea and Ancillary Industries in Sarangani Co-petitioner Morton Grant College Program Amendments (CHAINS). argued the federal government was Act of 2008. The Sea Grant program While it is not yet economically wrong to give up regulatory control addresses the ocean, coastal, and feasible to farm yellowfi n tuna and of fi sh farming 20 years ago when Great Lakes issues of today while help- other commercial tuna species, there it signed a memorandum of under- ing to develop the next generation are high-value marine species with standing with the province. Morton of American ocean researchers and good potential in both domestic and is convinced the waste and parasites policymakers. The Senate companion Asia-Pacifi c markets, including grou- that escape from fi sh farms are threat- bill, S. 3160, was introduced by Daniel per, pompano, mangrove snapper, and ening wild salmon fry and other sea K. Inouye (D-HI) and was co-sponsored Asian sea bass. The sustainability of life. While the farms may be techni- by Senators Ted Stevens (R-AK), Maria aquaculture operations depends on cally within provincial territory, the Cantwell (D-WA.), Olympia Snowe the feeding systems used, the accept- farms affect federally-managed ocean (R-ME), John Kerry (D-MA), and Jack ability of products in local and foreign waters, she said. Now she wants the Reed (D-RI). markets, and choice of location for federal Department of Fisheries and H.R. 5618 would reauthorize the operations, Macaraig said. Oceans to take the job back. National Sea Grant College Program The petition was brought forth through fi scal year 2014. The Sea british Columbia fi sh farming in the hope that forcing control of Grant program provides education, regulatory authority challenged fi sh farms back under one regula- training, and technical assistance A collective of groups opposed to tory authority would make it easier to programs that promote the under- fi sh farms fi led a petition with the campaign for the protection of wild standing and management of ocean, Supreme Court of British Columbia salmon. Judgment is expected in three coastal, and Great Lakes resources at against the provincial government to four months. the local, regional, and national levels. and the fi sh-farming company Marine The program was last reauthorized in Harvest Canada. The petitioners are National Fish Habitat Conservation the 107th Congress. biologist Alexandra Morton, the act of 2008 Pacifi c Coast Wild Salmon Society, the On Wednesday, 24 September Philippine tuna industry explores Wilderness Tourism Association, the 2008, Senators Joe Lieberman (I-CT), aquaculture Southern Gillnetters Association, and Christopher Bond (R-MO), Hillary at the 10th National Tuna congress the owners association Rodham Clinton (D-NY), and George held in September in General Santos of British Columbia. If the challenge Voinovich (R-OH) introduced the City, Philippines, aquaculture experts is accepted, the responsibility would National Fish Habitat Conservation Act encouraged more tuna industry stake- return to the federal government of 2008 (S. 3552) into the Senate. holders to diversify into aquaculture under the Fisheries Act. Under this legislation, federal and as a way of adapting to the decline Representatives for co-respondent state governments, the recreational in harvests. Aquaculture production Marine Harvest argued that the con- and commercial fi shing industries, the in the Philippines has signifi cantly cept of a fi shery was separate from conservation community, and busi- expanded over the years, with the that of aquaculture, and to term the nesses will be able to work together industry now valued at $750 million. latter a fi shery would be unnatural. collectively to conserve and protect Stricter enforcement of tuna They suggested that a salmon grown aquatic habitats using science-based management conservation measures in a fi sh farm was as close to being conservation approaches. The National has resulted in lower catch levels part of a wild fi shery as a barnyard Fish Habitat Conservation Act directs worldwide. “This increased domestic chicken to a wild fowl. A repre- critical new resources toward the aquaculture production can fi ll in the sentative for co-respondent British nation’s fi sh and aquatic communities current supply gap in local and foreign Columbia Salmon Farmers Association markets and ensure the country’s food stated that the industry complies with Continued on page 515

484 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Feature: Socioeconomics

Ohio’s 2006 Lake Erie Charter

Abstract: Charter fishing provides important angler access to Lake Erie sport fishing and is Frank R. Lichtkoppler economically important to local recreational harbor communities. To update information from Fred L. Snyder our 2002 survey, we conducted a mail survey of 517 randomly selected Ohio charter boat captains in early 2007 and received usable information from 249 captains. In 2006, there were 786 Ohio Kelly E. Riesen licensed charter guides. This is a decline of 9% from the 861 licensed captains in 2002. Charter Lichtkoppler is a professor firms in 2006 made on average 2.6 more trips per firm (44.7) than in 2002 (42.1). These captains at Ohio State University made an estimated 28,563 charter trips in 2006 of which almost 87% were full-day and just over Extension and an 13% were half-day trips. Charter fishing continues to bring nature-based tourism dollars into local extension specialist with lakefront communities. Our survey data may be used to update the economic impact estimates of Sea Grant, Painesville. this significant sector of the coastal fishing economy. He can be contacted at [email protected]. Fuero 2006 de la Industria Pesquera del Lago Erie, Ohio Snyder is an associate Resumen. El fuero pesquero provee a los usuarios acceso a la pesca deportiva del Lago Erie y es professor Ohio State importante desde el punto de vista económico para las comunidades locales que dependen de esta actividad. University Extension and Para actualizar la información de un estudio llevado a cabo en 2002, condujimos a principios de 2007 un an extension specialist sondeo por correspondencia, al azar, a 517 capitanes de embarcaciones incluidos en el fuero; recibimos with Sea Grant, Port información utilizable de 249 de ellos. En el 2006 se registraron 786 guías con licencia dentro del fuero, lo Clinton. Riesen is a que representa una disminución del 9% con respecto a 2002, cuando habían 861 capitanes con permiso. En 2006 cada firma dentro del fuero hizo, en promedio, 2.6 viajes per cápita (44.7) más que en 2002 (42.1). Los former fisheries extension capitanes entrevistados dieron un estimado de 28,563 viajes en 2007, de los cuales casi el 87% fueron de días program coordinator with completos y solo 13% fueron viajes de medio día. Bajo este tipo de administración, sobre la base de “turismo- Sea Grant, Ohio State natural”, la pesca continúa captando dólares para las comunidades ribereñas del lago. Nuestro sondeo puede University Extension, ser utilizado para actualizar los impactos de este importante sector de la economía pesquera costera. BayVillage

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 485 Introduction about 9% of its effort (ODNR 2007). Charters use a variety of walleye fishing methods with being most popular followed by flat-line The Ohio charter industry was first surveyed by Ohio Sea Grant in the western end of the lake; casting, flat-line trolling, and Extension in 1985 (Lichtkoppler et al. 1987). Dawson, Lichtkoppler, controlled-depth trolling common in the central portion of the lake; and Pistis (1989) were the first to compile region-wide data on the and controlled-depth trolling the method of choice in Ohio’s far east- Great Lakes charter industry. The Great Lakes charter industry was ern Lake Erie waters (ODNR 2007). The 2006 charter boat harvest last comprehensively surveyed in 2002 by the Great Lakes Sea Grant of walleye was up 93% over 2005, and at over 354,000 fish it was Network, and the results were reported in Fisheries (Kuehn et al. the highest harvest since 1998 (ODNR 2007). Still, charter effort 2005). Recently, the Michigan State University Recreational Marine was down almost 9% from 2005 (ODNR 2007). Far fewer walleye Research Center utilized this data and other charter fishing studies were released in 2006 compared to 2005 as the very large 2003 year to develop an estimate of the basin-wide economic impact of the class grew beyond the 38.1 cm (15-inch) length limit. The charter- Great Lakes Charter fishing industry (Great Lakes Commission 2007; angler walleye harvest rate was the highest since 1977 at 0.95 fish per U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2007). “The direct 2003 economic hour compared to an average of 0.59 fish per hour for the private boat impact of charter customer trip spending was estimated at $16.7 mil- angler (ODNR 2007). lion in sales, $6.9 million in wages and salaries, and $9.2 million in value added to local economies, sustaining 331 jobs” (Great Lakes Methods Commission 2007:9). Lake Erie is the shallowest, southernmost, and most nutrient rich At the end of 2006, a list of Ohio-licensed charter guides was of the five Great Lakes, and this makes it the most biologically pro- obtained from the ODNR, Division of Wildlife. Starting with the ductive (Government of Canada and U.S. Environmental Protection 2002 survey, we updated and modified the survey instrument to Agency 1995). The Lake Erie walleye (Sander vitreus), yellow perch reflect changing needs and current issues of the industry in2006. (Perca flavescens), and smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) fisher- Survey items relating to the benefits of Ohio professional charter ies are well known. Rural Ottawa County in the heart of Lake Erie’s association membership, types of services offered, and methods of western basin ranks third behind Franklin County (Columbus) and advertising were eliminated in favor of items relating to marketing Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) in Ohio resident fishing license sales. limit catches and perceived importance to clientele of various reasons Ottawa County is first in annual non-resident fishing license sales for chartering. New issues such as the cost of fuel, flooding, and nega- (20% of the 2006 total) and first in non-resident three-day fishing tive publicity about Lake Erie were added. Core economic and social license sales (49% of the 2006 total; ODNR 2006). items on the charter business that have been asked since 1985 were The Ohio Lake Erie charter fleet was shown in preceding surveys not changed. to be the largest charter fishing fleet on the Great Lakes. It has much In January–March 2007, a randomly drawn sample of 550 of the in common with other Great Lakes states charter fishing industries 786 licensed charter guides were surveyed by mail using a modified and may be illustrative of basic fishery trends, industry issues, busi- Dillman (1978, 2000) technique as in previous Ohio charter captain ness concerns, social changes, and the natural resource dependence surveys. Non-respondents were sent up to three reminder letters. A of many U.S. charter fishing industries. A 2006 survey of the Ohio total of 33 (6%) of the 550 surveys were returned as undeliverable, charter captains was conducted in order to update the database for out of business, or did not charter in 2006. Subtracting 6% from the this industry and is the sixth such survey to be conducted by Ohio Sea 786 licensed captains gives us an estimated 739 active Ohio charter Grant Extension since 1985 (Lichtkoppler and Hushak 1993, 2001; captains in 2006. A total of 249 of 517 surveyed captains returned Lichtkoppler 1997). surveys with usable data, a response rate of just over 48%. In this Lake Erie charter fishing offers access to a high-quality, fun, safe, article we primarily report the information provided by the 232 six- and productive angling opportunity on a large freshwater sea to many pack (6-passenger) charter captains who responded to our survey. shore-bound and small-boat anglers who do not have a Great Lakes Where appropriate we also report the wages earned and opinions of seaworthy craft. To operate in Ohio waters of Lake Erie, charter cap- charter captains who pilot larger vessels and do not operate their own tains must be licensed by the U.S. Coast Guard to carry passengers business. and must obtain an annual Ohio Guide’s License from the Ohio In survey research, the issue of non-response bias is often a prob- Department of Natural Resources (ODNR). Ohio charter anglers lem. For example, roughly half of the sample did not respond to this accounted for almost 13% of the 2.9 million survey. It is important to know whether or not angler hours of Ohio Lake Erie walleye fishing that half of the sample differed in any signifi- effort and almost 19% of the 1.9 million wall- cant way from the half that responded. One eye harvested in 2006 (ODNR 2007). strategy to address the non-response issue is Ohio’s Lake Erie walleye and yellow perch to compare early and late respondents, since fisheries are sustained by naturally reproduc- late respondents tend to be similar to non- ing populations. In 2006, the annual aver- respondents (Miller and Smith 1983). Recall age population size for walleye was close to bias or the ability to remember information the long-term average but the yellow perch accurately may be an issue between early and population was somewhat below the long- late respondents. One would expect early term average. The excellent 2003 year class respondents to have better recall than late of both walleye and yellow perch dominated respondents. In this survey, we do not believe the angler harvest in 2006 (ODNR 2007). that this is a problem. The economic and trip The Ohio charter fleet targets walleye survey items ask for such detailed information with 90% of its effort and yellow perch with that they could only be answered by referring

486 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g to business and financial records needed for the efficient manage- Table 1. Organization of Ohio’s Lake Erie charter boat fishing businesses. ment of the responding firms. Indeed, a few respondents mentioned that they had to go to their accountant to provide the economic data Business organization Number of respondents Percent of respondents requested. We compared the responses of early respondents (n = 162) with Charter firms the late respondents (those responding after the second mail con- Owned own boat 186 83% tact, n = 71) using a one-way ANOVA. There were no significant Leased/rented boat 1 < 1% differences (P ≤ 0.05) for the 22 economic variables tested. When Other arrangement 8 4% we compared the number of trips taken by early and late respondents Work for hire captains we found that early respondents took significantly moreF ( = 4.0, df = 171, P ≤ 0.05) yellow perch trips (6.7 trips) and (F = 5.1, df = Freelance hire per trip 27 12% 167, P ≤ 0.05) combination of species trips (3.6 trips) compared to Salaried employee 3 1% late respondents (4.5 yellow perch trips and 1.3 combination trips). Total 225 100% Significant differences (Pearson Chi-Square = 27.1, df = 9,P ≤ 0.05) were found using a Chi-Square test for 1 out of 14 attitudinal vari- Charter firm ownership ables on what captains think their customers look for in a charter trip. Sole proprietorship 154 81% Therefore, the sample results following may be representative in terms Partnership 8 4% of economics and for the most part are representative for operational Corporation 20 11% and attitudinal variables. Thus, we grouped the sample results and Other 8 4% considered them to be representative of 2006 Ohio charter captains. Total 190 100%

Results leased/rented a boat or operated their own firm under some other arrangement. The rest were salaried employees and freelance hires Charter Business Characteristics paid by the trip. Of those owning or leasing their boat, the majority (81%) operated their business as a sole proprietorship. Almost 12% The typical six-pack Ohio charter-fishing captain in 2006 has of the captains (27) were “work for hire” captains who did not own been licensed for 12.8 years. Ohio Charter captains may be grouped a charter boat. Most businesses (91%) operated one boat, which was into two categories: (1) those who own and operate their own busi- typically 8.69 ± 0.85 meters (28.5 feet) long, 13.8 (± 6.8) years old, ness and (2) those who work for a salary or for hire by other firms and powered by an inboard (84%), inboard/outdrive (11%), or out- (Table 1). Approximately 87% of 225 respondents either owned or board (5%) motor.

Frigid Units, Inc.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 487 The average estimated replacement cost for an Ohio charter May at 6.2 trips (almost 16% of total). Captains averaged 4.4 trips vessel is $75,851 (± $49,049), and replacement cost for onboard (11% of the total) in August, about 3.9 trips (less than 10% of the business-related equipment is $11,410 (± $12,184). About 35% of effort) in September, 1.9 trips (about 5%) in October, and 1.9 trips the respondents use a vehicle for towing their boat and other char- (about 5%) in April. Trips taken in March were negligible. Almost ter-related business. The average replacement cost of the vehicle 9% of the captains reported making some charter fishing trips on was $32,044 (± 11,792); for the trailer, it is $3,815 (± $2,504). The other Great Lakes. Charter fees vary according to target species, vehicle is used for boat towing almost 9% of the time and for other length of the charter, and services offered. The most popular trip charter business about 31% of the time. was the whole-day walleye charter; its cost averaged $469 (± $71) Almost 94% of all the responding captains were “six-pack” per boat (range $240 to $650). operators, licensed to carry no more than six passengers. About 7% Applying the response data from Table 3 to the total population of the responding captains were licensed to carry more than 6 pas- of 639 charter firms yielded an estimated total of 28,563 charter sengers. The charter firm is largely a secondary source of income for trips, of which almost 87% were full-day and just over 13% were captains who like the work and want to help people enjoy fishing. half-day trips (Table 4). Estimated total revenues were generated by Notably, just over 13% of the captains rely on the charter business multiplying the number of trips times the average charge per trip. as their primary source of income. (Table 2) Walleye accounted for 74% of the estimated revenues. Yellow perch made up 13% of the total estimated revenues, a combination of spe- Charter Trips cies 7%, smallmouth bass 4%, and steelhead the final 2%.

Responding captains average almost 39 full-day and not quite Costs and Returns 6 half-day paid charter trips per year. Most (73%) of these were for walleye, 15% were for yellow perch, 3% for smallmouth bass, Operating costs are those costs necessary to operate and run the about 2% for steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss), and about 6% were charter business and do not include the cost of buying a boat (Table for a combination of species (Table 3). Only 18% of 190 responding 5). Operating costs include both seasonal costs such as dockage, captains ran more than one charter per day. Those captains running winter storage, insurance, occasional unpredictable expenses such more than one trip per day ran doubles on only 6 days in 2006. June as boat and equipment repairs, and such day-to-day expenses as fuel is the busiest month for Lake Erie charter captains, with an average and labor. Operating costs and boat-loan payments are a cash out- lay required to run the charter business. Boat loan payments must of almost 11.6 trips. Almost 30% of all trips taken in 2006 were in be made regardless of how the vessel is used and are thus not an June. This was followed by July with 9.3 trips (24% of the total) and operational cost. Capital costs are the costs to buy a boat. Capital costs consist of interest costs and depreciation on the vessel being Table 2. Reasons for Ohio charter captains entering / remaining in the charter purchased. Interest and depreciation are a high cost for those buy- fishing business (number of respondents = 232). Respondents were asked to ing and depreciating their boats. check all items that applied and multiple choices were allowed. For boat-owning captains, the largest annual operating expense

by far was for boat fuel in 2006. From 1985 to 1998 fuel costs Reason Number of respondents Percent of respondents declined from a high of 27% of the operating costs in 1985 to 20% Like the work 168 72% of the operating costs in 1998 (Lichtkoppler and Hushak 2001). In Help people enjoy fishing 165 71% 2002 the fuel costs rose to 23% of the operating costs and in 2006 Secondary source of income 126 54% they jumped to 29% of the operating costs (Lichtkoppler 2003). Primary income source 31 13% Boat dockage, miscellaneous expenses, and equipment repair were Other 19 8%

Table 3. Reported average number of trips of trips average charge per trip and calculated revenues earned per firm by species sought and trip length.

Fish species Trip length average number of trips per businessa average charge per tripb revenues earned per businessc Walleye Full day 28.0 $469 $13,132 Half day 4.6 $370 $1,702 Steelhead Full day 0.9 $503 $453 Half day 0.1 $358 $36 Smallmouth bass Full day 1.5 $467 $701 Half day 0 $366 $0 Yellow perch Full day 5.7 $403 $2,297 Half day 1.0 $338 $338 Combination of species Full day 2.7 $469 $1,266 Half day 0.2 $370 $74 Subtotal Full day 38.8 $17,849 Half day 5.9 $2,145 Totals 44.7 $19,995 a Rounded to the nearest tenth b Rounded to the nearest dollar c Revenues are estimated by multiplying the average number of trips times the average charge per trip.

488 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g the next highest expenses for operating a charter business in 2006 reported by the captains responding to the survey. Firms reporting (Table 5). boat loan payments generated $18,034 ± 19,971 in sales. Firms The average cash requirement to operate the charter firm is reporting depreciation had sales of $17,708 ± $17,707. Firms not comprised of operating expenses plus boat-loan payments. Sixty- reporting boat loan payments or depreciation made only $14,012 ± three captains reported average annual boat-loan payments of $12,343 in sales. The result is a net negative cash flow of –$887 for $4,521. For all firms reporting economic data, the average annual all reporting firms, a positive cash flow of $1,390 for those reporting cost to operate an Ohio charter firm is $16,412, for those reporting boat loan payments, a negative cash flow of –$567 for those report- boat-loan payments it is $16,644, for those reporting depreciation ing depreciation, and a positive cash flow of $2,563 for those firms it is $18,275, and it is $11,449 for those who do not report a boat not reporting boat loan payments or depreciation. Depending on loan payment or depreciation (Table 6). This means that the typi- cal charter firm that owns and operates a single vessel must generate the individual situation, only those firms with a positive cash flow sales of between $11,449 and $18,275 to meet the cash needs of the could pay day-to-day bills to operate the charter business from the firm, depending on whether or not they are purchasing and depre- revenues earned from chartering. ciating their vessel. Economic costs are the costs of operating the charter firm plus Estimated average annual revenues for all 167 firms reporting the capital costs (Table 7). Boat-loan costs are a cash requirement their sales figures are $15,525 ± $15,502. The $19,995 in sales esti- if a loan exists, but are not part of the economic costs. Capital mated from Table 3 is well within the standard deviation of the sales costs include depreciation of the boat and the opportunity cost of

Table 4. Estimated number of trips, average charge per trip, revenues earned, and percent of total revenues by the Ohio charter industry in 2006 by fish species and by trip length.

Fish species Trip length estimated number of trips average charge per tripa total revenues earnedb Percent of total revenues Walleye Full day 17,892 $469 $8,391,348 66% Half day 2,939 $370 $1,087,430 9% Steelhead Full day 575 $503 $289,225 2% Half day 64 $358 $22,912 < 1% Smallmouth bass Full day 959 $467 $447,853 4% Half day $0 $366 $0 0 Yellow perch Full day 3,642 $403 $1,467,726 11 Half day 639 $338 $215,982 2 Combination of species Full day 1,725 $469 $809,025 6 Half day 128 $370 $47,360 < 1 Subtotal Full day 24,793 Half day 3,770 Totals 28,563 $12,778,861 100% a Rounded to the nearest dollar b The numbers of trips are extrapolations of respondent trip rates applied to the estimated population of 639 active boat owning Ohio charter firms. Revenues are calculated from the number of trips multiplied by the average charge per trip.

Table 5. Average annual operating costs for all reporting boat-owning captains, for captains reporting boat loans, for captains reporting depreciation, and for captains not reporting a boat loan or depreciation. N = number of respondents

All firms Firms with boat loan Firms with depreciation Firms without boat loan or depreciation Item Expense N Expense N Expense N Expense N Fuel/oil $3,416 162 $3,409 61 $4,022 33 $3,267 78 Dockage $1,372 169 $1,323 62 $1,622 36 $1,330 82 Miscellaneous $1,025 158 $1,056 60 $1,246 36 $938 75 Equipment repair $1,019 163 $1,156 61 $1,073 36 $1,063 78 Advertising $963 162 $1,080 62 $1,018 36 $889 76 Insurance $903 172 $895 63 $938 36 $889 85 Boat maintenance and repair $803 165 $656 60 $814 36 $930 80 Office and communications $647 158 $899 59 $1,121 36 $432 75 Boat storage fees $612 160 $622 62 $570 36 $577 74 Labor (hired) $370 155 $355 58 $462 36 $406 74 Boat repair not covered by insurance $329 150 $333 58 $382 36 $301 69 License fees $180 165 $195 60 $178 36 $175 81 Drug testing/professional dues $140 170 $101 63 $100 36 $181 83 Boat launch fees $110 155 $43 60 $291 36 $71 72 Total operating costs $11,891 $12,123 $13,839 $11,449

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 489 owning a boat instead of investing in stocks, bonds, or some other depreciation it is $15,488. Any revenue in excess of these figures is enterprise. the return to owner’s labor and management. The average annual depreciation reported by 36 responding cap- To provide a positive return to the operating captain for time tains was $7,014 ± 11,765. A crude approximation of the capital cost and labor, the average Ohio charter business would have had to of owning a boat was developed by adding opportunity costs, esti- generate sales exceeding $23,268 to cover the average operating and capital costs. The average Ohio charter business had a negative mated at 5% of the estimated replacement cost of the boat ($75,851 return of –$7,743. Depending on the depreciation and boat-loan ± 49,049) and equipment ($11,410 ± 12,184) for a total of $87,261, situation, the Ohio charter firms not reporting boat loan or depre- to the annual depreciation. Opportunity costs based on 5% of the ciation operated at a net negative return of –$1,476 for the owner’s replacement cost of the boat and equipment were $4,363. Thus the time and labor. Those reporting depreciation had a net negative capital cost (depreciation plus opportunity costs) was $11,377. The return of –$7,289 and those with boat loans had a net negative economic cost to operate a typical Ohio charter firm was $23,268. return of –$3,156. At an average price of $469 for a full-day walleye For a firm depreciating a vessel, it was $24,997, for a firm reporting a charter, a typical captain would have to run as many as 50 trips to boat loan it was $21,190, and for firms not reporting a boat loan or cover average operating and capital costs. Captains not reporting a

Table 6. Average revenue, cash flow needs, and net cash flow to the firm for Ohio Lake Erie charter boat businesses in 2006 estimated by all businesses, businesses reporting boat loan payments, businesses reporting depreciation, and businesses not reporting boat loan payments and/or depreciation. Negative numbers are indicated in parentheses. N is the number of actual respondents.

Income/expenses all Businesses Businesses Businesses Businesses reporting boat loan reporting depreciation not reporting boat loan payments or depreciation Amount N Amount N amount N Amount N Average revenue $15,525 167 $18,034 63 $17,708 34 $14,012 88 ± $15,502 ± $19,971 ± $17,964 ± $12,343

Cash flow needs Average operating costs $11,891 150 $12,123 58 $13,839 36 $11,449 69 Boat-loan payments $4,521 63 $4,521 63 $4,436 11 NA NA Cash needed $16,412 $16,644 $18,275 $11,449 Net cash flow (–$887) $1,390 (–$567) $2,563

Table 7. Economic cost components, total economic cost and net return to the operator for Ohio Lake Erie charter boat businesses in 2006 estimated by all businesses, businesses reporting boat loan payments, businesses reporting depreciation, and businesses not reporting boat loan payments and/or depreciation. Negative numbers are indicated in parentheses. N is the number of actual respondents.

Income/expenses all Businesses Businesses Businesses Businesses reporting boat loan reporting depreciation not reporting boat loan payments or depreciation Amount N Amount N amount N Amount N Economic cost Average operating cost $11,891 150 $12,123 58 $13,839 36 $11,449 69 Capital costs Opportunity costsa $4,363 174 $4,741 58 $4,144 36 $4,039 93 Depreciation 7,014 36 $4,326 11 $7,014 36 NA NA Total economic cost $23,268 $21,190 $24,997 $15,488 Net return to operator (–$7,743) (–$3,156) (–$7,289) (–$1,476) aOpportunity costs are estimated at 5% of the average estimated replacement cost of the boat and on board equipment.

Table 8. Captains’ perceived importance of marketing a limit catcha (harvest) for the following species to their charter business. (Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding errors.)

Species Number of respondents Importance of those responding (in percent) Not extremely Not very somewhat Very Extremely Walleye 223 < 1% 2% 21% 43% 33% Yellow Perch 213 1% 2% 20% 44% 32% Smallmouth bass 144 13% 26% 35% 17% 8% Steelhead 105 33% 30% 22% 11% 5% aThe daily limit for walleye from March 1 to April 30 was 4 and from May through the following February it was 6. The daily limit for yellow perch was 40. The daily limit of smallmouth bass was 5 with a closed no-posession season during May and June to protect spawning bass. For steelhead, the daily bag limit was 5 from May 15 to Through August 31 and 2 from September 1 to May 15.

490 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g boat loan or depreciation would have to run over 33 trips to cover their economic costs. Captains reporting depreciation would have Track your fish with the to run over 53 trips and captains reporting a boat loan would have Track your fish with the to run over 45 trips to break even. mostmost advancedadvanced acousticacoustic

Operation Characteristics trackingtracking receiverreceiver available today. Captains reported having an average of almost 13 years experience available today. in the Lake Erie charter industry. On a scale of 1 = not extremely important to 5 = extremely important, captains ranked marketing a limit catch (the maximum daily harvest of sport fish anglers are allowed to possess) for walleye and yellow perch at 4.0 or very impor- tant (Table 8). Marketing a limit catch for smallmouth averaged 2.8 or somewhat important. Marketing limit catches of steelhead ranked just over 2.2 or not very important. Seventy-six percent of the captains responding said that marketing a limit catch of walleye and yellow perch were either very important or extremely important. About 76% of the clientele were repeat customers who booked with the captains in 2005 or a previous year. About a quarter of the clientele (24%) were new customers who had never booked with the captain prior to 2006. Approximately 81% of Ohio charter customers come from 50 miles or further away from the charter firm’s homeport, bringing nature-based tourism dollars into local lakefront communi- ties. Captains were given a list of items which customers might want in a charter and asked to rank them on a scale of 1 = not very impor- tant to 10 = very important. Recreation with friends, limit catches, and safety were the top three ranked items (Table 9). Based on returns from survey respondents, of the 786 licensed VEMCO’s VR100 Acoustic captains in 2006, an estimated 6% or 47 were out of business or not actively chartering, leaving an estimated 739 active captains. Tracking Receiver is the Of these captains, an estimated 87% (639) were boat-owning char- ter firms that made an estimated 28,563 charter trips in 2006 com- ultimate fish tracking solution. pared to an estimated 27,414 trips made by 651 active charter firms hether you are actively tracking large pelagic fish in 2002 (Lichtkoppler 2003). In 2006, the active charter captains or conducting presence/absence studies, the generated an estimated $10.6 million in gross revenues (639 firms x W VR100 will get the job done. The VR100 has a flexible $15,525 per firm plus 98 captains for hire x $6,990). This is compared systems architecture with 8MB of non-volatile internal to the inflation adjusted to 2006 dollars estimate of $12.3 million in memory, GPS positioning and precise timing, USB link gross revenues generated by 765 active captains in 2002 (651 firms x to PC or laptop, and field installable software upgrades. $17,881 plus 114 captains for hire x $5,669; Lichtkoppler 2003; U.S. Other features include: Department of Labor 2008). Captains were asked to select the three most important problems  Simultaneous, multi-frequency reception and facing the charter industry (Table 10). The top concern by far was the detection tracking algorithms cost of fuel (gasoline/diesel/oil) followed by illegal fishing practices, the  Wide dynamic range allowing multi-tag reception economy, impacts of exotic species (zebra mussels, etc.), and drawing without gain adjustment  Splash proof case with marine grade connectors  Operates with coded and continuous tags Table 9. What captains believe clientele look for in a charter on a scale of (sold separately) 1 = not very important to 10 = very important.  Operation frequency 10-100kHz

Item Score Number of respondents VEMCO (a division of AMIRIX Systems Inc.) Recreation with friends 8.4 219 Tel: 902-450-1700 Fax: 902-450-1704 Catch a limit of targeted species 8.3 223 Safety 8.3 218 www.vemco.com Catch fish for food 7.6 220 Cost (price of the charter) 7.3 216 Learn more about 7.0 219 Making Waves in Catch a trophy fish 6.9 220 Acoustic Telemetry Learn more about Lake Erie 5.6 217 Catch a variety of fish 4.3 210 Vemco (A Division of Amirix) Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 491 clients. It is interesting to note that except for drawing clients these and labor, a continuing decline in the number of Ohio charter firms concerns are largely outside the control of individual charter captains. is expected. However, the remaining charter firms in 2006 did make With almost 16% of the respondents planning to quit the business on average 2.6 more trips per firm (44.7) than in 2002 (42.1). Most and some firms not making a positive net return to the operators’ time captains (61%) planned to increase the number of trips they make over the next five years, over 36% planned to increase their charter fees, and Table 10. Concerns of the Ohio Lake Erie charter fishing industry (number 24% planned no major changes to their business (Table 11). of respondents = 232). Respondents were asked to indicate their three most important concerns from the list presented below. Strategies for Charter Businesses

Concern Percent of respondents Over the years strategies for Lake Erie charter firms have not changed indicating item was a concern dramatically, but it may be helpful to review them again (Lichtkoppler Cost of fuel (gasoline/diesel/oil) 64% 1997; Lichtkoppler and Hushak 2001; Kuehn et al. 2005). Captains Illegal fishing practices 42% should critically examine their charter business management plan with The economy 38% an eye toward improvement. Results of the 2006 Ohio Charter Captain Impacts of exotic species (e.g., zebra mussels) 28% Survey suggest that to increase future profitability, charter captains will Drawing clients 21% try to increase revenues by increasing the number of trips and increase Boating equipment and operating costs 19% their prices where possible. The current survey shows that high boat-loan payments are a drain Poor weather/climate 17% on cash flow. For all reporting firms, firms reporting boat loans, and Negative publicity about Lake Erie 15% firms reporting depreciation, the boat loan payment is the largest single Fisheries management 13% need for cash for the firm. For firms reporting no boat loan payments Over harvest of fish stocks 12% and no depreciation, fuel is the largest cash need. Capital costs of own- Fish consumption advisories 11% ing a boat are a large part of the total economic cost of running a char- Changes in the tax laws that make charters ter firm ranging anywhere from 26% for those not reporting a boat loan less attractive to business clients (e.g., no longer tax deductible) 10% or depreciation to almost 49% for all firms. As only 11% of respon- Other problems 10% dents plan on purchasing a bigger boat in the next five years, captains may be holding onto older, paid-off charter boats in good condition to Government regulations 10% reduce expenses. Since 1990, the average age of the charter fleet has Lack of fish/reduced abundance 10% continually increased from 5.5 years to 13.8 years (Lichtkoppler and Poor weather forecasting 8% Hushak 2001; Kuehn et al. 2005). Firms reporting boat loan payments Unsportsmanlike behavior of anglers 8% and depreciation also report higher sales as these captains must run Unsportsmanlike behavior of captains 7% more trips (generating higher sales) to try to meet the revenue needs of Overcrowding of the fishery 7% their businesses. Additionally, only 19% of responding captains plan to Toxic contaminants 7% purchase a new boat in the next five years. Changes in forage fish populations 5% The most direct way to increase revenues is to increase the price Flooding at my home port hurt my business 2% and number of charter trips that are made and by offering additional services such as executive charters or dive charter trips. Increasing prices may or may not be possible depending on the demand and the Table 11. Five-year plans of Ohio Lake Erie charter captains (number of specific market in which a captain operates. A few captains increase respondents = 232). Respondents were asked to select all the plans that applied the numbers of trips they make by following the seasonal nature of the to them. fishery and moving their base of operations to follow the fish from port

to port during the angling season. Half-day trips may be a way to lower Activity Percent of respondents selecting a change planned for their charter costs to clients and increase the total number of trips made. activities in the next five years Women are an underrepresented audience within both the charter Increase of number of annual trips 61% fishery and the general sport fishery. A recent nationwide survey of fish- Increase prices of charter services 36% ing participation found that only 25% of anglers were female (USFWS No major changes 24% 2006). Marketing efforts targeted toward women could yield an increase Buy/operate newer boat 19% in bookings. Advertising can be directed toward women’s organiza- Quit the charter business 16% tions, clubs, and publications, and charter trips could be designed with Buy/operate bigger boat 11% amenities and activities that hold extra appeal to women. Research to determine the needs, preferences, and priorities of past, Branch out into other fishing related businesses 10% current, and potential charter clientele is needed to determine if the Decrease number of annual trips 6% captains are correct in what they perceive their clients are seeking in a Expand into multi-activity and/or non-fishing charters 5% charter trip. Such research may find new ways to appeal to the growing Buy/operate an additional boat(s) 4% number of middle-aged, nature-experience tourists (male and female) Buy own charter boat 4% with above-average disposable incomes looking for new “adventures.” Hire additional charter captain(s) 3% Contacting former clients may help captains to identify their reasons Hire additional first mate(s) 3% for discontinuing chartering and rekindle previous client relationships. Decrease prices 1% As noted in earlier charter surveys, (Lichtkoppler 1997; Lichtkoppler Other 7% and Hushak 2001; Kuehn et al. 2005) captains should market an active

492 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g nature-based tourism experience on a world-class resource and try to expand the client base by cooperating with local, state, and regional tourism bureaus. VEMCO’sVEMCO’s VR2WVR2W deliversdelivers Conclusion thethe bestbest resultsresults inin freshwaterfreshwater As each of the Great Lakes is different, so too we would expect some differences in the various charter fisheries on each lake. However, andand marinemarine environmentsenvironments the large size of the Ohio charter fleet compared to the total Great Lakes charter fleet may allow some Great Lakes-wide representation of the entire industry on industry issues, business concerns, social and Over 10,000 units deployed worldwide economic issues, and dependence on the fishery resource base. provides opportunities for researchers Factors that likely will positively influence the success of charter businesses include the success of annual recruitment within walleye, to collaborate and share data! yellow perch, and smallmouth bass populations. Stability and species The VR2W Single Channel Receiver was designed us- diversity in Lake Erie’s sport fishery have enabled captains to fish for ing the same proven technology as the VR2. Affordable, multiple species, improving customer catch rates and broadening the compact, easy to use, long-lasting and flexible, the VR2W angling experience. Businesses that utilize diversification strategies to is ideal for any freshwater and marine research project. With attract customers—such as offering non-fishing charters and charters the VR2W, VEMCO has made the VR2 even better! geared to the diverse needs of experiential tourists as well as women and minority anglers—are also likely to attract more customers, thus  Significantly faster upload increasing profitability. Factors that may continue to negatively influ- speed - retrieve data 20 ence the industry are downturns in the economy, high fuel prices, times faster than the VR2 potential declines in Lake Erie sport fish population numbers, and cus- and from up to 7 receivers tomer perceptions of issues such as fish diseases and chemical contami- simultaneously nants in Lake Erie fish.  Increased data storage The surge in fuel prices in 2008 has caused some captains to increase capability enables users to prices by as much as $50 per trip, but this price increase does not cover the collect substantial amounts $90 to $120 daily fuel costs (Captain Ron Johnson, Thumper Charters, of field data - 8 MBytes pers. comm.). Other captains have anecdotally reported increased can- (1-million detections), 4 cellation rates of up to 25% of their previously booked charters. It is safe times that of the VR2 to say that high fuel prices and the state of the economy are negatively  Field upgradable design affecting the Ohio Lake Erie charter industry in 2008. allows the VR2W to be Seven of ten responding captains are in the charter business because upgraded in the field they like the work and want to help people enjoy fishing. The charter business is only a secondary source of income for most captains. Several  All detections are retained in non-volatile memory so factors are likely to influence the future size of the charter boat indus- data is saved even if the unit unexpectedly fails try including the profitability of the remaining businesses. Profitability  Fully compatible with various size coded transmitters varies greatly by individual firm. Cash flow may be a problem for the and sensor tags average business and the firm that is reporting depreciation. In strictly economic terms, the long-term survival of charter boat businesses is The VR2W also uses enhanced PC Software. The new dependent on a positive net return to the operator after economic costs VEMCO User Environment (VUE) PC Software for are subtracted from revenue. The average firm had a negative return initialization, configuration and data (loss) of over –$7,743, firms reporting depreciation had a negative upload from VEMCO receivers allows users to combine data from multiple return of –$7,289, firms reporting boat loan payments had a negative receivers of varying types into a single return of –$3,156, and even firms not reporting boat loan payments integrated database. and depreciation lost –$1,476. With all of this red ink further reduc- tions in the number of charter businesses could occur if the net return Contact us about affordable options for upgrading to the charter business does not increase or captains move into other your VR1s and VR2s to VR2W receivers. businesses seeking greater economic returns for their efforts. Marketing that emphasizes the charter industry’s ability to bring VEMCO (a division of AMIRIX Systems Inc.) friends together and provide a high probability of fishing success in a Tel: 902-450-1700 Fax: 902-450-1704 safe boating environment provides a positive image for the industry www.vemco.com and counter negative images of Lake Erie. Efforts to develop a clear understanding in current and potential customers about health-related and fisheries management issues affecting the Lake Erie sport fisheries should be a priority of charter captains, charter-boat associations, fish- Making Waves in eries managers, and tourism promotion agencies in order to encourage Acoustic Telemetry stability in angler effort and, consequently, in the size and profitability of the charter boat industry in the future. b Vemco (A Division of Amirix)

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 493 Acknowledgements Lakes. North American Journal of Fisheries Lichtkoppler, F. R. 2003. Ohio’s Great Lake char- Management. 9:493-499. ter fishing industry in 2002. Ohio Sea Grant This article is a result of work that was Dillman, D. A. 1978. Mail and telephone sur- College Program. OHSG-TS.036. Columbus, supported, in part, by the Ohio Sea Grant veys: the total design method. John Wiley and Ohio. Sons, New York. Miller, L. E., and K. L. Smith. 1983. Handling College Program (project A/EP-5 Regional _____. 2000. Mail and Internet surveys: the tai- nonresponse issues. Journal of Extension XXI Fisheries Extension and project A/EP-1 Core lored design method. 2nd Edition. John Wiley (Sept/Oct) 45-50. Extension) from the National Oceanic and Company, New York. ODNR (Ohio Department of Natural Atmospheric Administration (NOAA grant Great Lakes Commission. 2007. Great Lakes Resources). 2006. Historical license sales by NA06OAR4170020 and NA16RG2252), recreational boating’s economic punch. Ann county. www.ohiodnr.com/wildlife/dow/regu- U.S. Department of Commerce. Support was Arbor, Michigan. lations/historical.aspx. Columbus, Ohio. _____. 2007. Ohio’s Lake Erie fisheries, 2006. also provided by the Ohio Board of Regents, Government of Canada and US Environmental Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration The Ohio State University, and Ohio State Protection Agency. 1995. The Great Lakes—an environmental atlas and resource Project F-69-P. Ohio Department of Natural University Extension. The Ohio Sea Grant book. Great Lakes National Program Office, Resources, Division of Wildlife, Lake Erie College Program is administered by The Ohio Chicago, Illinois. Fisheries Units, Fairport and Sandusky. State University. Kuehn, D., F. Lichtkoppler, and C. Pistis. 2005. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2007. John The authors wish to thank Carmina The Great Lakes charter fishing industry: 1973 Glenn Great Lakes Basin Program-Great Chiappone for her assistance in developing to 2002. Fisheries 30(3):10-17. Lakes Recreational Boating. Main Report— the data base for this project and to Leroy Lichtkoppler, F. R. 1997. Ohio’s Lake Erie char- Draft. March 2007. Detroit, Michigan. Hushak, Eugene Braig IV, and Thomas Blaine ter fishing industry: 1985-1994. Fisheries U.S. Department of Labor. 2008. Bureau of Labor for their helpful comments. Thanks to all the 22(1):14-21. Statistics, Consumer Price Indexes. Internet charter captains who responded to the 2006 Lichtkoppler, F. R., L. J. Hushak, D. O. Kelch, website found at www.bls.gov/cpi/, accessed on and F. L. Snyder. 1987. The 1985 Ohio char- 29 February 2008. Ohio Lake Erie Charter Captains Survey. ter captains survey. Fisheries 12 (4):14-18. Lichtkoppler, F. R., and L. J. Hushak. 1993. USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). References Ohio’s 1990 Lake Erie charter fishing industry. 2006. 2006 National survey of fishing, hunt- Fisheries 18 (1):14-21. ing, and wildlife-associated recreation. U.S. Dawson, C. P., F. R. Lichtkoppler, and C. Pistis. _____. 2001. Ohio’s 1998 Lake Erie charter fish- Department of the Interior, Washington, 1989. The charter fishing industry in the Great ing industry. Fisheries 26 (1):15-23. D.C.

494 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Feature: Toshihide Hamazaki Fisheries Management Hamazaki is a regional biometrician with the Division of Commercial Fisheries, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, “When people argue about fish, Anchorage. He can be contacted the fish disappear.” at [email protected] —Bob Aloysius, a Yup’ik elder, Kuskokwim River

Fishery Closure “Windows” Scheduling as a Means of Changing the Chinook Salmon Subsistence Fishery Pattern: Is It an Effective Management Tool?

Abstract: This study examined the effectiveness of subsistence fishery closure “windows” scheduling as a management tool for conservation of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in the Kuskokwim River, Alaska. The windows, which reduced subsistence fishing from seven days to four days a week, were implemented in 2001 to conserve early migrant/upper- river Chinook salmon stock and to provide subsistence harvest opportunities for upper-river communities. The windows were expected to (1) reduce the proportion of Chinook salmon harvests in the early season, (2) delay the harvest timing, and (3) extend the total fishing days. To examine its effectiveness, subsistence salmon harvest calendars (1989–2006) were collected and examined for changes in harvest timing before and after the windows were implemented. The results showed that the windows did not reduce harvests early in the season, delay the harvest timing, or extend the total fishing days. This suggests that the windows were not effective. Potential reasons for this failure are discussed. Programa de vedas como medio para modificar el patrón de pesca de subsistencia del salmón boquinegra ¿Es una medida efectiva de manejo?

Resumen: En este estudio se examina la efectividad del programa de vedas sobre la pesca de subsistencia como medida de manejo para conservar el salmón boquinegra (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) en el Río Kuskokwim, Alaska. Las “ventanas” que contemplan las vedas reducen la pesca de subsistencia de 7 a 4 días a la semana, se implementaron en 2001 para cuidar a los primeros salmones que llegan a la región y para brindar oportunidades de pesca de subsistencia a las comunidades ribereñas. Se esperaba que esta ventana permitiera (1) reducir la proporción de captura de salmón boquinegra durante el inicio de la temporada, (2) retrasar el tiempo de cosecha y (3) extender el número total de días de pesca. Para evaluar su efectividad, se colectaron y analizaron los calendarios de pesca de subsistencia del salmón (1989–2006) para detectar cambios en los tiempos de captura antes y después de que la implementación de las vedas. Los resultados muestran que las ventanas no reducen la captura al inicio de la temporada, ni retardan el tiempo de captura o extienden el número total de días de pesca. Esto sugiere que las “ventanas” no fueron efectivas. Se discuten razones potenciales al respecto. P e t Ka i ser B hel res de nt D ave F olle ti , ADF &G D ave F olle ti , ADF &G

Fritz Charles (left) of Tuntatuliak Alaska, fishes for Chinook salmon on the Kuskokwim River. Sharon and Fritz Charles (center) cut Chinook salmon to prepare them in a traditional manner at their camp. In the background his mother tends their daughter. Chinook Salmon strips (right) hang to air dry.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 495 Introduction identity, and a way of life exercised for cial chum salmon fishery). The Alaska generations, in which the people harvest Board of Fisheries (BOF) determined Throughout communities in Alaska, and process varieties of fish, wildlife, the annual “amounts necessary for sub- subsistence (customary and traditional) and plants throughout the year as each sistence” (ANS) to be 64,500–83,000 salmon fishery has significant economic, becomes available (Wolfe 1982; Coffing fish for Chinook, 39,500–75,500 for cultural, and traditional importance. 1991; Simon et al. 2007a). chum, 27,500–39,500 for sockeye, and In Alaska statute, subsistence uses are The subsistence salmon fishery is 24,500–35,000 for coho salmon (5 AAC defined as “the noncommercial, custom- important for communities along the 01.286(b)). Their Chinook salmon har- ary and traditional uses of wild, renew- Kuskokwim River (Figure 1). Salmon vest accounts for more than 50% of the able resources…for direct personal or comprises 49–53% of total annual subsis- Chinook salmon subsistence harvest in family consumption as food, shelter, tence fish and wildlife harvest by weight, the state of Alaska (ADF&G 2005). fuel, clothing, tools, or transportation, ranging from 240 to 650 lbs. (109 to 295 Recognizing the importance of sub- for the making and selling of handicraft kg) usable salmon in weight per capita sistence fisheries, and pursuant to state articles out of nonedible by-products of (Coffing 1991; Simon et al. 2007a). The law, the Alaska Department of Fish and fish and wildlife resources taken for per- subsistence salmon fishery harvests four Game (ADF&G) is mandated to manage sonal or family consumption, and for the major species: Chinook (Oncorhynchus salmon fisheries: (1) to ensure conserva- customary trade, barter, or sharing for tshawytscha), chum (O. keta), sock- tion of the salmon stocks by sending a personal or family consumption” (AS eye (O. nerka), and coho salmon (O. target number of salmon to spawning 16.05.940(33)). kisutch; Whitmore et al. 2005). Of those, sites (escapement) for each stock, (2) to Unlike commercial or sports fisher- Chinook salmon is the most prized and ensure meeting subsistence fishery har- ies, the subsistence fishery is a basic food harvested exclusively for subsistence use vest needs (ANS) across communities, necessity, a part of traditional-cultural (except for bycatch from the commer- and (3) to maximize the value of com-

Figure 1. Kuskokwim River management area.

496 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g mercial and sports harvests (ADF&G Since 1988, to ease this conflict, the subsistence harvests (since there are no 2004). The subsistence fishery is con- Kuskokwim salmon fishery has been harvest limits in subsistence fisheries), ducted with fewer restrictions and with- jointly managed by the ADF&G and the but to reduce the harvest early in the out harvest limits, unless the number of Kuskokwim River Salmon Management season (Burkey et al. 2002). This would returning salmon is too low to meet the Working Group (KRSMWG). The reduce harvest of early-migrant/upper- escapement. When the salmon fishery KRSMWG is composed of represen- river stocks, shift lower-river harvest is restricted to meet escapement goals, tatives from communities and fishing timing closer to the migration timing, all non-subsistence fisheries (e.g., com- interests throughout the river (Francisco and consequently would send more early- mercial, sports) must be closed before et al. 1989; Ebbin 2002, 2003, 2004). migrant/upper-river stocks to escapement the subsistence fishery is restricted (AS During the fishing season, KRSMWG grounds and ensure harvests for upper- 16.05.258(b) (4)). and ADF&G meet weekly to evaluate river communities (Douglas Molyneaux, The management of a subsistence fish- run strength, escapement, and progress of ADF&G, pers. comm.). Based on polling ery is challenging, especially in a large the subsistence and commercial harvests. throughout Kuskokwim River communi- river such as the Kuskokwim. Fisheries in Following this review, the KRSMWG ties, KRSMWG recommended ADF&G large rivers are characterized as “sequen- recommends management actions to to reduce the subsistence salmon fishery tial fisheries,” where mixed salmon ADF&G. Although ADF&G has the from 7 to 4 days a week, from Wednesday stocks (e.g., lower, middle, upper river authority to accept or reject the recom- to Saturday (Krauthoefer and Martz spawning stocks) are harvested sequen- mendation, KRSMWG and ADF&G 2004; ADF&G 2005). tially by fishing communities along the typically reach consensus. KRSMWG is From its inception, the windows were river, as salmon migrate from the mouth also influential on the BOF in establish- implemented flexibly, depending on to the spawning grounds (Criddle 1996). ing fishery management policies. abundance and run timing of Chinook In this fishery, lower-river communities salmon (Table 1). Most subsistence can harvest all stocks throughout the Fishery disasters and implementation fishers complied with the windows and season, whereas upper-river communi- of the closure windows were able to harvest sufficient num- ties can harvest only upper-river stocks bers of salmon (Krauthoefer and Martz after they were harvested by the lower- Salmon returns to Kuskokwim River 2004). Chinook salmon escapement also river communities. Therefore, upper- and throughout western Alaska started increased across the drainage (Linderman river stocks are the most susceptible to to decline significantly in 1997. This and Bergstrom 2006). Simultaneously, fisheries, and the availability of fish to prompted a declaration of the Kuskokwim the same Chinook salmon return has upper-river communities depends on River as an economic disaster area by increased since 2001, which was reflected harvests by lower-river communities. the state of Alaska in 1997, 1998, 2000, in the ease of scheduling in recent years The management challenge is conserv- and 2001 (ADF&G 2005; Whitmore ing upper-river stocks while meeting the (Table 1). A preliminary study indicates harvest needs of all communities along et al. 2005). In 2000, the commercial that the average run size increased from the river. chum salmon fishery was restricted, 1985 to 1995, declined sharply from 1996 In the Kuskokwim River, 80-90% and KRSMWG, ADF&G, and other to 2000, and has increased since 2001 to of Chinook salmon is harvested in the Native and local organizations appealed the same level of the early 1990s (Brian lower-river district (W-1: Figure 1), par- to subsistence fishers to conserve/mini- Bue, Bue Consulting, pers. comm.). This ticularly in Bethel (at 106 river kilome- mize harvests of chum and Chinook suggests that the increase of the escape- ter [rkm]), the largest community on the salmon. In 2001, the commercial chum ment is not due to the windows, but to river (Molyneaux et al. 2005). Bethel salmon fishery was closed to conserve an increase of Chinook salmon run size. accounts for 28–43% of the total lower- both Chinook and chum salmon, and This raised skepticism about the river subsistence Chinook salmon har- under the Kuskokwim River Salmon effectiveness of the windows to alter the vest (Jim Simon, ADF&G, pers. comm.). Rebuilding Management Plan (5 AAC harvest timing pattern. In fact, reducing The lower-river subsistence fishery is 07.365), the BOF authorized ADF&G to fishing days does not necessarily reduce often characterized as “front-loaded”; implement a subsistence fishing closure harvests. Subsistence fishers could the majority of fishing occurs during the schedule, “windows,” throughout the increase fishing efforts during the open early part of the Chinook salmon migra- Kuskokwim River drainage (Burkey et periods and harvest the same number of tion period (Bue 2005). Because upper- al. 2000; Simon et al. 2007a). fish per week as without the scheduling river stocks tend to migrate earlier in the The primary objective of the windows (John Hilsinger, ADF&G, pers. comm.). season (Stuby 2005), the lower- was not to reduce total Chinook salmon This suggests that the windows may not river fishery is believed to harvest primarily upper-river stocks and Table 1. Summary of the annual subsistence fishery windows implementation. significantly decrease their escape- Year windows scheduling implementation dates ment and harvest opportunity of the upper-river communities. 2001 W-1 (lower-river): 3 June; W-2 (mid-river): 10 June; upper-river: 17 June (through end of the season) This led to intense upriver-down- 2002 W-1: 9 June; W-2: 28 June (through end of the season) river conflicts in the 1980s, when 2003 W-1: 1 June; W-2: 8 June; upper-river: 15 June (through end of the season) 2004 W-1: 3-20 June salmon returns decreased (Ebbin 2005 W-1: 5-19 June 2002, 2003, 2004). 2006 W-1: 5-19 June

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 497 have any effect on changing the subsis- Bethel test-fish data (1997–2000), and (3) the restricted tence harvest timing pattern. subsistence fishery during increasing The objective of this study is to eval- Since 1983, salmon upriver migration Chinook salmon (2001–2006). uate the effectiveness of the window timing in Bethel has been monitored scheduling on the subsistence harvest by ADF&G Division of Commercial Results pattern in Bethel. Based on objectives of Fisheries using drift gillnets from June to the windows, the following predictions late August at three stations along the were examined: the windows would (1) Kuskokwim River main stem channel Bethel subsistence fishery and Chinook decrease the proportion of harvest in the (Bue 2005). At 1 hour after high tide, salmon migration timing early season, (2) delay the subsistence 2 gillnets (5 3/8-inch and 8-inch mesh Chinook salmon harvest timing, and sizes, 50-fathom length) were drifted for The calendars confirmed the front- 20 minutes, and daily catch-per-unit- loaded characteristics of subsistence (3) extend the total number of days over effort (CPUE) was calculated for each Chinook salmon harvest in Bethel. The which Chinook salmon are harvested. species. Use of 8-inch mesh was discon- subsistence Chinook salmon fishing tinued on 10 July when the majority of spanned from early May to late August, Materials and Methods Chinook salmon had passed the Bethel with the median harvest date 13–16 area. June. About 90% of the Chinook salmon were harvested between late May and Subsistence harvest timing data Data Analyses early July (Figure 2, Table 2). On aver- age, each household fished 2–3 days a Subsistence harvest timing data have Harvest calendar data in the Bethel week, harvested 8-11 Chinook salmon been collected by using subsistence catch area were combined for each year, and per fishing day, and fished over a span of calendars by the ADF&G Division of the following harvest timing indices 18–20 days (fishing season days) to catch Subsistence since 1989 throughout the were calculated: 5th percentile (p5) date, the needed amount of Chinook salmon. Kuskokwim region, as a part of annual 25th percentile (q1) date, median date, This harvest timing was earlier and subsistence fish harvest household - sur 75th percentile (q3) date, 95th percentile more condensed than the Chinook vey (ADF&G 2005; Simon et al. 2007b). (p95) date, inter-quartile length (50% salmon upriver migration timing. The While the household survey collects range), and inter 90th percentile length Bethel test fish showed that about 90% data on total harvest and use of subsis- (90% range). The above timing indi- of fish migrated between early June and tence salmon by households, the catch ces were also calculated for the Bethel mid-July over a span of 33–36 days, and calendar collects data on harvest timing test-fish data. Because harvest timing is the median date was 21–23 June. (Figure by households (Simon et al. 2007 a b). partially affected by migration timing, 2, Table 3). Overall, the subsistence Prior to the fishing season, a sub- adjusted harvest timing indices were cal- Chinook salmon fishing started 3–7 days sistence catch calendar was delivered culated by subtracting the timing dates earlier, reached median dates 6–7 days to each household that: (1) fished the of the Bethel subsistence calendar from earlier, and ended 8-17 days earlier than previous fishing season, (2) is known those of the Bethel test fish (i.e., test- the migration timing (Table 4). The per- to have fished salmon in the previous fish date minus subsistence calendar centage of Chinook salmon in the total three years, and (3) requested the calen- date). The adjusted timing indices would daily salmon harvest was 80–100% until dar. The participants used the calendar become smaller as the subsistence har- mid-June, and declined sharply to 30% to record the date and the number of vest timing shifts closer to the migration by late June. salmon harvested by species. At the end timing. The proportion of early season of the season, the calendar was mailed harvest was calculated as the proportion Effects of the windows on the back to the ADF&G, or was collected in of harvest taken by the date when 25% subsistence harvest pattern of Chinook salmon had migrated (i.e., person during the annual subsistence fish q1 date of the Bethel test fish). For each Overall, there were no significant dif- harvest household survey. Participating household, the mean number of Chinook ferences in harvest timing indices among in the calendar program was voluntary. salmon harvested per fishing day (catch/ the three periods. Although the propor- In Bethel, the usable number of fishing day), the length of days between tion of early-season catch decreased returns was 25–95 households, or 5–20% the first day they started fishing and the slightly from 58.9% during period 1 to return ratio. Among the participating last day they caught Chinook salmon 53.0% during periods 2 and 3, the dif- households, 50–60% of the households (fishing season days), and the frequency ference was not significant (Table 4). harvested more than 30 Chinook salmon of fishing days per week (fishing days/ Adjusted q1 and median dates decreased per year. In Bethel, those households per week) were calculated. slightly from period 1 to period 3, but the year accounted for 30% of the fishing The above indices were compared difference was not significant (Table 4). households, and their harvests accounted among the three periods that were iden- On the other hand, the adjusted p95 date for 70–80% of Chinook salmon har- tified from the history of the fisheries: (1) increased significantly by 6–9 days from vested in Bethel (unpublished data). the unrestricted subsistence fishery dur- period 1 to period 3 (Table 4: Wilcoxon This suggests that harvest timings from ing abundant Chinook salmon (1989– ranks sum test, P < 0.05); however, the households that returned calendars 1996), (2) the unrestricted subsistence there was no difference between peri- would be representative of Bethel. fishery during declining Chinook salmon ods 2 and 3. Finally, the adjusted 90%

498 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g range increased significantly from period Figure 2. Timing distribution of Chinook salmon in Bethel subsistence fishery harvests and 1 to period 3, but there was no differ- migration timing at the Bethel test-fish. Symbols indicate dates of: median (circle), 25th and 75th percentile (vertical line), and 5th and 95th percentile (square). ence between periods 2 and 3 (Table 4: Wilcoxon ranks sum test, P < 0.05). There were some differences in house- Bethel hold harvest patterns among the three 1988 periods. Average daily Chinook salmon Subsistence catch (catch/day) was the lowest during 1989 Test-fish period 2 (7.9) but was similar in periods 1990 1 and 3 (10.4 and 10.6; ANOVA, P = 0.013; Table 2). Average number of days 1991 fishing per week (fishing days/week) was 1992 the lowest during period 3 (2.1/week) but was similar in periods 1 and 2 (2.4 1993 and 2.6; ANOVA, P = 0.0001). There 1994 was no difference in fishing season days among the three periods (ANOVA, P = 1995 0.42). 1996 Finally, the average annual number of Chinook salmon harvested in Bethel 1997 did not differ significantly among the three periods (Table 2). On the other 1998 hand, the harvests in upper-river com- 1999 munities (Crooked Creek, Red Devil, Sleetmute, McGrath, and Nikolai: com- 2000 munities upriver of W-2 district Figure 2001 1) declined significantly during periods 2 and 3 (ANOVA, P < 0.05). 2002 2003 Discussion 2004

The primary objective of the win- 2005 dows was to reduce the Chinook salmon subsistence harvest early in the season to 2006 ensure escapement and reasonable fishing 2007 opportunities among all subsistence users 5/28 6/2 6/7 6/12 6/17 6/22 6/27 7/2 7/7 7/12 7/17 7/22 7/27 (Burkey et al. 2002). The windows were expected to (1) decrease the proportion of harvest in the early season, (2) delay Table 2. Subsistence harvest timing statistics of Chinook salmon in Bethel. the subsistence Chinook salmon harvest timing, and (3) extend the total number Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 (1989–1996) (1997–2000) (2001–2006) of days over which Chinook salmon are High abundance Pre-windows with windows harvested. However, results showed that Number of sample households per year 47–62 58–74 25–95 the windows had no effect on chang- ing the front-loaded subsistence harvest p5 date June 3 (3.3) June 5 (2.5) June 2 (3.4) pattern. q1 date June 8* (2.0) June 12 (2.1) June 11 (2.1) Median date June 13 (1.2) June 16 (1.7) June 15 (0.9) The primary reason for the failure q3 date June 18 (2.1) June 21 (2.2) June 18 (1.2) was that the windows were not restric- p95 date July 2* (5.4) Jun 30 (3.8) June 27 (1.1) tive enough to reduce subsistence fish- 50% range 10 (1.9) 8.8 (0.5) 7.7 (2.0) ing opportunities and harvests. Average 90% range 28.8* (4.6) 24.8 (1.7) 24.3 (2.9) subsistence fishers fished less than four % early harvest 58.9 (15.4) 53.0 (22.6) 53.0 (15.7) 1 days a week even before implementation Catch /fishing day 10.4 (14.2) 7.9* (5.1) 10.6 (6.2) Fishing season days2 19.8 (12.4) 19.8 (12.3) 18.1 (11.6) of the scheduling, and they were able Fishing days/week 2.4 (1.6) 2.6 (1.6) 2.1* (1.1) to increase harvests when they fished Annual subsistence harvest in Bethel 23,407 (4,333) 23,182 (1,640) 23,873 (4,120) because of increased harvesting efforts or Annual subsistence harvest in increased Chinook salmon return since upper-river communities3 3,567* (668) 2,905 (775) 2,487 (468)

2001. Further, many subsistence fish- Mean and standard deviation in parenthesis. ers prefer and consider it advantageous 1Number of Chinook salmon harvested per fishing day per household. 2Total number of days harvesting Chinook salmon was fished per household. to start fishing early and constantly 3Crooked Creek, Red Devil, Sleetmute, McGrath, and Nikoli. All communities are located upriver of the W-2 district. throughout the season (Wolfe 1982). *significant (P < 0.05) difference from other period

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 499 This suggests that the windows schedul- 1991). They typically harvest Chinook is superior in quality and taste than ing would not have been effective even salmon with larger mesh (e.g., 8 inches) later arriving fish, especially for fresh it were more restrictive because subsis- nets and other salmon (chum, sockeye, consumption. tence fishers would make every effort to coho salmon) with small mesh (e.g., 6 It is also unlikely that subsistence continue the front-loaded harvest pat- inches) nets. The large mesh allows them fishers would change the front-loaded tern. Thus, to understand the failure, it to catch large Chinook salmon and to harvest pattern. Delaying the Chinook is imperative to examine why they prefer avoid catching other small fishes. In fish salmon harvest would result in loos- the front-loaded harvest pattern. processing, they clean the salmon, cut it ing the drying period, doubling fishing into strips or steaks, hang it on open-air efforts for both Chinook salmon (i.e., Elements potentially affecting drying racks for several weeks, and smoke using large mesh nets) and for other subsistence harvest timing it for another two weeks. The majority of salmon species (i.e., using small mesh subsistence fishing occurs from late May nets), and harvesting Chinook salmon The Chinook salmon subsistence to the end of July because these are the of lesser quality. These factors could harvest is a piece of the subsistence way driest months of the summer (Coffing jeopardize the chances of harvesting of life inherited throughout generations, 1991). By August, the weather becomes and processing the necessary amounts of and the front-loaded Chinook salmon rainy and stormy making it difficult to fish in time before the weather becomes harvest timing was probably developed as properly dry and smoke salmon. unfavorable. the best fit to the entire subsistence cycle. The above circumstances validate In the Kuskokwim River, salmon start to the preference for and advantages of the Unexpected impacts of the windows return in mid-May until late September, front-loaded Chinook salmon harvest with Chinook salmon being the earliest pattern. The front-loaded harvest pattern While the windows did not reduce and the least abundant migrant, return- not only maximizes drying periods, but the subsistence fisher’s fishing oppor- ing from mid-May to mid-July (Table 3). also separates and streamlines harvesting tunities, it synchronized their fishing Although migration of Chinook salmon and processing of Chinook salmon from dates, removing their ability to deter- peaks in late-June, its percentage of all other fishes. Catching Chinook salmon mine fishing dates based on their needs returning salmon decreases from 100– is also more efficient early in the season and availability of fish. This would not 90% in May to less than 10% by mid- than later in the season. Kuskokwim only intensify competition for good fish- June (unpublished data). During the River Yup’ik elders James Charles and ing sites (Mike Martz ADF&G, pers. salmon season, households move to tra- Bob Aloysius explained that they fish in comm.), but also increased uncertainties ditional fishing camps along the river for the early season when weather is good, of harvesting sufficient number of fish. fishing and processing salmon (Coffing and that early migrant Chinook salmon For instance, large pulses of Chinook salmon may pass through a fishing area Table 3. Migration timing statistics for Chinook salmon from the Bethel test fish. during the closed period, leaving fewer fish available during the open period. Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 The subsistence fishers may not be (1989–1996) (1997–2000) (2001–2006) High abundance Pre-windows with-windows able to harvest during the open periods because of bad weather. To reduce those p5 date June 7 (2.4) June 9 (3.8) June 9 (3.2) q1 date June 15 (3.3) June 17 (4.8) June 15 (2.3) uncertainties and secure harvesting of median date June 21 (3.9) June 23 (3.7) June 21 (3.1) the needed amount of salmon, they may q3 date June 26 (4.4) June 29 (7.6) June 28 (2.5) harvest more fish during the open period p95 date July 10 (6.5) July 15 (7.8) July 14 (3.6) and stay ahead of their harvesting sched- 50% range 11.3 (2.3) 12.0 (5.2) 12.7 (1.6) ule. This may explain condensation of 90% range 33.3 (4.8) 36.3 (6.1) 34.8 (5.0) Chinook salmon harvest timing during periods 2 and 3 (Table 4).

Challenges in subsistence fishery Table 4. Adjusted subsistence harvest timing (test-fish migration timing date - subsistence management harvest timing date). All positive indices, dates show that subsistence harvest dates occurred earlier than the migration timing dates. In conclusion, the windows failed to alter the front-loaded subsistence fish- Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 ery harvest timing primarily because of (1989–1996) (1997–2000) (2001–2006) High abundance Pre-windows with-windows the lack of understanding about tradi- p5 date 4.3 (2.2) 3.3 (3.3) 6.7 (2.8) tion and culture of subsistence fisher- q1 date 6.8 (2.8) 5.3 (4.2) 4.5 (3.0) ies. This also illuminates challenges in Median date 7.4 (3.6) 6.8 (2.6) 6.2 (2.3) management of subsistence fisheries. q3 date 8.0 (3.5) 8.5 (5.4) 9.5 (3.0) Subsistence salmon harvest patterns are p95 date 8.8* (4.0) 14.8 (5.7) 17.1 (3.5) developed over many generations and 50% range 1.3 (3.2) 3.3 (5.3) 5.0 (3.3) are closely tied to cultural heritage and 90% range 4.5* (4.2) 11.5 (6.2) 10.4 (3.9) identity maintenance, representing an * significant (P < 0.05) difference from other periods (Wilcoxon rank sum test) enduring way of life. The pattern may

500 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g not be easily modified by fisheries man- _____. 2005. Alaska subsistence fisheries tence surveys. Arctic Yukon Kuskokwim agement actions and regulations because 2003 annual report. ADF&G, Division Sustainable Salmon Initiative. Available subsistence fishers would likely make of Subsistence, Juneau. at: www.aykssi.org/docs/Project_Docs/ Bue, D. G. 2005. Data summary for the every effort to keep their traditional fish- Final_Reports/100.pdf (Accessed 21 Kuskokwim River salmon test fishery ing pattern. March 2008). In 2007, the window scheduling was at Bethel, 1984-2003. Fishery Data Series 05-14, Alaska Department of Linderman, Jr., J. C. and D. J. Bergstrom. discontinued because Chinook salmon Fish and Game Division of Commercial 2006. Kuskokwim river Chinook returns increased dramatically. The BOF Fisheries, Anchorage. and chum salmon stock status and also, for the first time since 1986, approved Burkey, C. E., M. Coffing, D. B. Kuskokwim area fisheries; a report to a resumption of Chinook salmon com- Molyneaux, and P. Salomone 2000. the Alaska Board of Fisheries. Alaska mercial fishery at harvest level of 0 to Kuskokwim river Chinook salmon stock Department of Fish and Game Division 50,000 fish. However, the issues deriv- status and development of manage- ing from the front-loaded subsistence ment/action plan operations. Regional of Commercial Fisheries, Special publi- harvest timing still remain unresolved: Information Report 3A00-40, Alaska cation 06-35, Anchorage. the front-loaded harvest pattern causes Department of Fish and Game Division Molyneaux, D. B, D. L. Folletti, L. K. higher exploitation of upper-river stocks of Commercial Fisheries, Anchorage. Brannian, and G. Roczicka. 2005. Age, and reduces harvesting opportunities for Burkey, C.E., M. Coffing, J.E stensen, R. sex, and length composition of Chinook the upper-river communities. Unless this L. Fisher, and D. B. Molyneaux. 2002. salmon from the 2004 Kuskokwim Annual management report for the harvest pattern is altered, these issues River subsistence fishery. Fishery Data subsistence and commercial fisheries will resurface when the Chinook salmon of the Kuskokwim area, 2001. Fishery Series 05-45, Alaska Department of return declines, as cautioned by a Yup’ik Management Report 02-53, Alaska Fish and Game Division of Commercial elder, Bob Aloysius, “When people argue Department of Fish and Game Division Fisheries, Anchorage. about fish, the fish disappear.” It is a chal- of Commercial Fisheries, Anchorage. Simon, J., T. Krauthoefer, D. Koster, and lenge to develop a management scheme Coffing, M. 1991. Kwethluk subsistence: D. Caylor. 2007a. Subsistence salmon that is effective and acceptable to the contemporary land use patterns, wild harvest monitoring report, Kuskokwim subsistence fishers. Understanding the resource harvest and use, and the sub- Fisheries Management Area, Alaska, traditions and culture of the subsistence sistence economy of a lower Kuskokwim fishery is an initial step toward successful River area community. Technical 2004. Technical paper 313, Alaska management. b Paper 157, Alaska Department of Fish Department of Fish and Game Division and Game Division of Subsistence, of Subsistence, Juneau. Acknowledgements Anchorage. Simon, J, T, Krauthoefer, D. Koster, Criddle, K. R. 1996. Predicting the M. Coffing, and D. Caylor. 2007b. consequences of alternative harvest I thank Tracie Krauthoefer, David Bethel subsistence fishing harvest regulations in a sequential fishery. Koster, and Jim Simon of the ADF&G monitoring report, Kuskokwim fisher- North American Journal of Fisheries Subsistence Division and their field sur- Management 16:30-40. ies management area, Alaska, 2001- vey staff for data collection and shar- Ebbin, S. A. 2002. What’s up? The trans- 2003. Technical paper 330, Alaska ing, valuable insights about Kuskokwim formation of upstream-downstream Department of Fish and Game Division salmon subsistence fisheries, and criti- relationships on Alaska’s Kuskokwim of Subsistence, Anchorage. cal review of this manuscript. I thank River. Polar Geography 26(2):147-166. Stuby, L. 2005. Inriver abundance of Daniel Bergstrom, Linda Brannian, John _____. 2003. Swimming upstream: insti- Chinook salmon in the Kuskokwim Hilsinger, John Linderman, Michael tutional dimensions of asymmetrical Martz, Douglas Molyneaux, and Elizabeth problems in two salmon management River, 2002-2004. Fishery Data Series Smith of the ADF&G Commercial regimes. Marine Policy 27:441-448. 05-39, Alaska Department of Fish and Fishery Division for their critical review _____. 2004. The anatomy of conflict and Game Division of Sports Fisheries, of this manuscript and valuable insights the politics of identity in two coop- Anchorage. about Kuskokwim salmon fisheries. erative salmon management regimes. Whitmore, C., M. M. Martz, D. G. Bue, Finally, I thank KRSMWG, especially Policy Sciences 37:71-87. J. C. Linderman Jr., and R. L. Fisher. Francisco, K. R., K. Schultz, D. J. elders James Charles and Bob Aloysius, 2005. Annual management report for Schneiderhan, D. Huttunen, C. for valuable insights about Kuskokwim Burkey Jr., H. Hamner, and R. the subsistence and commercial fisheries salmon fisheries. Walker. 1989. Annual management of the Kuskokwim area, 2003. Fishery report Kuskokwim Area, 1988. Regional Management Report 05-72, Alaska References Information Report 3B89-08, Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division Department of Fish and Game Division of Commercial Fisheries, Anchorage. ADF&G (Alaska Department of Fish and of Commercial Fisheries, Anchorage. Wolfe, R. J. 1982. The subsistence Game). 2004. Escapement goal review Krauthoefer, T. and M. Martz. 2004. salmon fishery of the lower Yukon of select AYK region salmon stocks. Southeast Sustainable Salmon Fund Regional Information Report 3A04- Arctic Yukon Kuskokwim Sustainable River. Technical Paper 60, Alaska 01, ADF&G, Division of Commercial Salmon Initiative final report. Project Department of Fish and Game Division Fisheries, Anchorage. 45228. 2003 Kuskokwim area subsis- of Subsistence, Anchorage.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 501 Perspective: Daniel E. Schindler, Fisheries Management Xan Augerot, Erica Fleishman, Nathan J. Mantua, Brian Riddell, Mary Ruckelshaus, Climate Change, Ecosystem Impacts, Jim Seeb, and and Management for Pacific Salmon Michael Webster

Abstract: As climate change intensifies, there is increasing interest in Schindler is a professor at the School developing models that reduce uncertainties in projections of global climate and of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, refine these projections to finer spatial scales. Forecasts of climate impacts on University of Washington, Seattle and ecosystems are far more challenging and their uncertainties even larger because of a he can be contacted at deschind@u. limited understanding of physical controls on biological systems. Management and washington.edu. Augerot is the conservation plans that explicitly account for changing climate are rare and even director of Pangaea Environmental, those generally rely on retrospective analyses rather than future scenarios of climatic conditions and associated responses of specific ecosystems. Using past biophysical Corvallis, Oregon. Fleishman is the relationships as a guide to predicting the impacts of future climate change assumes director of the Conservation and that the observed relationships will remain constant. However, this assumption Resource Management Program, involves a long chain of uncertainty about future greenhouse gas emissions, climate National Center for Ecological sensitivity to changes in greenhouse gases, and the ecological consequences of climate Analysis and Synthesis, Santa Barbara, change. These uncertainties in forecasting biological responses to changing climate California. Mantua is an associate highlight the need for resource management and conservation policies that are research professor at the School robust to unknowns and responsive to change. We suggest how policy might develop of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, despite substantial uncertainties about the future state of salmon ecosystems. University of Washington, Seattle. Riddell is the division head for Salmon Cambio climático, impactos a nivel and Freshwater Ecosystems, Science Branch, Department of Fisheries and ecosistema y manejo del salmón del Pacífico Oceans Canada, Nanaimo, British Resumen: A medida que el cambio climático se intensifica, existe un creciente Columbia. Ruckelshaus is a research interés en desarrollar modelos que reduzcan la incertidumbre en las proyecciones fishery biologist at the National del clima global, y llevar estas proyecciones a escalas más finas. El pronóstico de los Marine Fisheries Service, Seattle, impactos del clima sobre los ecosistemas es más difícil de abordar y la incertidumbre Washington. Seeb was chief scientist asociada es aun mayor porque se tiene un entendimiento rudimentario sobre for the Alaska Department of Fish los controles físicos en sistemas biológicos. Son pocos los sistemas de manejo y and Game, Anchorage, and is now conservación que consideran explícitamente el papel del clima, e incluso éstos a research professor at the School se basan en análisis retrospectivos más que en escenarios futuros de condiciones of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, climáticas y las correspondientes respuestas a nivel ecosistema. Al utilizar relaciones University of Washington, Seattle. biofísicas preestablecidas como guía para predecir los impactos de cambio climáticos, Webster is a program officer for The se asume que dichas relaciones permanecerán constantes. Sin embargo, esta suposición implica una larga cadena de imprecisiones con respecto a la intensidad Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, de futuras emisiones de gases de invernadero, sensibilidad climática a los cambios en San Francisco, California. estos gases, y las consecuencias ecológicas del cambio climático. La incertidumbre del pronóstico de las respuestas biológicas a un clima cambiante, resaltan la necesidad de políticas de manejo y conservación que sean suficientemente robustas a esas incógnitas y sensibles al cambio. Se sugiere cómo pueden desarrollarse tales políticas a pesar de la importante incertidumbre que existe en torno al estado futuro de los ecosistemas que albergan al salmón.

Overview of salmon tists across all nations of the SNPO have theses of these data have begun to shed responses to changing greatly advanced understanding of Pacific light on how salmon and their ecosystems climate salmon and their habitats. During this respond to changing climate. time period, environmental conditions of Pacific salmon are affected by climate Pacific salmon are icons of the natural the SNPO also have shifted substantially change across a hierarchy of coarse and and cultural heritage of coastal nations in response to inter-decadal climate vari- fine spatial and temporal scales; each of throughout the subarctic North Pacific ability and longer-term warming trends these scales has distinct implications for Ocean (SNPO). Since the 1960s, scien- (e.g., Schindler et al. 2005). Initial syn- development of policy that will be robust

502 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g to future climate change. At the scale et al. 2008). However, trends in both cli- duction coincides with warming trends in of the entire SNPO (Figure 1), biomass matic conditions and salmon production salmon watersheds and nearshore marine of Pacific salmon has increased substan- have not been uniform across the SNPO. waters in western North America, but tially over the last century (Figure 2; In western North America, inter-decadal cooling trends in the open waters of the Eggers 2009 in press), coincident with patterns of salmon production in north- interior North Pacific Ocean where most increases in global temperatures (IPCC eastern stocks (i.e., Alaska) are out of salmon feed and mature (Mantua et al. 2007). This increased salmon production phase with production regimes for stocks 1997; Hare et al. 1999). has been especially pronounced since the in the conterminous United States and At still finer spatial scales, stocks enter- mid-1970s (Mantua et al. 1997; Beamish Canada (Figure 3). This variation in pro- ing the ocean within 500-800 km of one another have weakly coherent responses to changes in local oceanographic con- Figure 1. Map of the distribution of salmon in the Subarctic North Pacific Ocean (SNPO). Letters ditions (Mueter et al. 2002; Pyper et al. and corresponding arrows depict the location and rough spatial scales over which data from 2005). This regional coherence in pro- Figures 3 and 4 were summarized. ductivity is most correlated with regional variation in sea surface temperatures (Mueter et al. 2002). However, at the scale of individual populations, responses to regional shifts in climatic conditions are diverse (Figure 4; Peterman et al. 1998; Hilborn et al. 2003; Crozier and Zabel 2006; Rogers and Schindler 2008). Further, salmon species vary consider- ably in their responses to regional climate changes (Hare et al. 1999). Identifying features of the environment and of salmon populations that produce the diversity of salmon responses to regional climate forc- ing is critical because these are the scales at which most management and conser- vation activities operate. Policies for managing salmon in the face of climate change must change if we hope to meet our conservation and management goals. Our ability to accu- Figure 2. Total biomass (thousands of metric tons) of chum (Oncorhynchus keta), sockeye (O. rately predict climate impacts on salmon nerka), and pink salmon (O. gorbuscha) inhabiting the SNPO (stippled area in Figure 1) from 1925–2005. Data are separated by species, continent of origin (North America [NA] versus ecosystems is incomplete and unlikely Asia (AS), and hatchery versus wild stocks). Not all hatchery contributions are known with high to improve to the point of accounting certainty (e.g., Russian pink salmon) so these are combined with the wild components. Data are for the regional response diversity noted from Eggers (2009 in press). above. Policies must be robust to these uncertainties rather than reliant upon prescriptive forecasts of climate and associated ecological conditions. Some such management strategies have been suggested as ways to account for climat- ically-driven changes in salmon produc- tion, without the need to understand the intricacies of climate impacts on salmon ecosystems (e.g., Walters and Parma 1996; Peterman et al. 2000). For example, Walters and Parma (1996) showed that a constant harvest strategy (i.e., one that exploits a constant proportion of stock each year) performs remarkably well at tracking long-term fluctuations in stock productivity, as would be caused by cli- mate change. The information needed to develop such a strategy relies heavily on our ability to forecast year-to-year varia- tion in abundance but does not necessar-

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 503 ily rely on an intricate understanding of might policy to address climate impacts The need for SNPO-wide salmon- the processes causing climatically-driven on salmon embrace the hierarchy of climate policy variation. Given our limited predictive spatial and temporal scales that charac- capacity, what information about the terize salmon responses to a changing Improved salmon-climate policy links between salmon and climate is use- environment? is needed at all of the spatial scales ful to current policy? In particular, how described above. First, we believe that proactive policy development at the scale of the entire SNPO is needed to help minimize future climate-induced political conflicts over the use of limited Figure 3. Standardized anomalies of salmon harvests along the North American west coast from prey resources by salmon from different 1925–2005. Data were smoothed with a 5-year running mean. Abbreviations are: ch = Chinook nations of the SNPO. At the scale of the salmon (O. tshawytscha), co = coho salmon, so = sockeye salmon, pi = pink salmon, BC = catch entire SNPO, increases in salmon bio- from British Columbia, US = catch from US lower 48 states, AK = catch from Alaska). mass largely reflect increasing numbers of hatchery-released salmon from Eurasia (Figure 2, Eggers 2009 in press) that com- pete with salmon from North American rivers when they overlap in international waters (Kaeriyama and Edpalina 2004; Ruggerone et al. 2005). This surge in salmon production was concurrent with a general cooling of North Pacific offshore habitat where salmon achieve most of their growth (Mantua et al. 1997; Hare et al. 1999). If the increasing trend in bio- mass is dependent upon the cooling trends in this offshore ecosystem, it is not likely to persist with ongoing climate warming. Thus, the institutional expectation of the SNPO’s capacity to produce salmon that has developed during the last few decades may prove overly optimistic as global atmospheric and upper-ocean tempera- tures continue to increase. In fact, capac- ity may decline if thermal characteristics of offshore habitat eventually switch tra- jectories and, consistent with global cli- Figure 4. Sockeye salmon (O. nerka) commercial catch (millions of fish) from Bristol Bay, Alaska, mate model projections, the upper ocean from 1893–2006, apportioned to five fishing districts associated with the major rivers of this region (updated from Hilborn et al. 2003). Data are smoothed with a 5-year running mean. begins warming. More extensive use of the Arctic Ocean by Pacific salmon may partially offset any diminished capacity of the SNPO. Nevertheless, international coordination of management of the open- ocean commons used by Pacific salmon needs refinement to address potential climate-driven changes in productivity. There is currently no coordinated vision for use of the SNPO (Holt et al. 2008).

Climate policy at regional scales

At intermediate (regional) spatial scales, policies that govern maintenance of habitat quality and harvest strategies could be modified to more appropriately account for complex stock structure and variation in climate impacts on different habitats used by salmon. Multi-decadal regimes of high salmon production (Beamish et al. 1999) due to favorable

504 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g ocean conditions may mask the erosion of and population sensitivity to changes in • Developing quantitative models that freshwater and estuarine habitat quality, temperature and precipitation varies sub- allow projections for temperature, pre- and within-stock biodiversity, that only stantially across the entire latitudinal gra- cipitation, and hydrologic conditions become evident once productivity in the dient that salmon occupy. The ecological to be reliably downscaled to the water- ocean decreases. For example, fisheries and climatic factors that produce intra- shed level. These models will facilitate for Oregon coho salmon (Oncorhynchus regional variation in population responses exploration of the probability that kisutch) appeared to be robust and sustain- to changing climate (e.g., Hilborn et al. regional conditions will support salmon able from the 1950s into the mid-1970s. 2003; Crozier and Zabel 2006; Rogers and in specific locations as climate contin- During this period, hatchery programs Schindler 2008) are poorly understood. ues to warm (Battin et al. 2007). grew rapidly and replaced wild stocks as It is useful to think of salmon landscapes • Developing models that allow for inte- the principal producers of juvenile coho as heterogeneous “filters” of climate. The gration of multiple factors influenc- environmental conditions experienced by salmon (Pearcy 1992). Intense harvest ing salmon ecosystems, including the rates that seemed appropriate for hatch- any individual population are produced cumulative impacts of climate change, ery stocks during periods of exception- from how the overriding climate signal is land use, and water use on habitat, fish- ally high marine survival proved too expressed in their habitat, as influenced by ery harvest, and hatchery effects. high for the long-term sustainability of its geomorphic, hydrologic, and ecological • Exploring the extent to which salmon wild stocks. In 1977, a shift in the state characteristics. We currently have a poor and co-occurring organisms might of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation gener- understanding of how landscapes filter cli- adapt to ongoing climate change, thus ated a 20-year period of unfavorable ocean mate signals, and how these in turn affect conditions for Oregon coho salmon. The salmon populations. This lack of knowl- affecting the direction and magnitude abundance of both hatchery and wild edge is an impediment to developing accu- of overall ecosystem response. The role coho salmon adults plummeted, sending rate predictions about the future status of of evolution in ecological responses to coho salmon populations and their fisher- specific salmon populations. However, to anthropogenic change of Earth systems ies into a decline from which they may be some extent, the regional diversity of popu- has been essentially ignored in conser- only beginning to recover. Accordingly, lation responses to climate change appears vation planning (Smith and Bernatchez despite their knowledge that hatcheries to derive from local adaptations of salmon 2007). This knowledge would inform were eroding the complex stock structure populations to heterogeneity in landform policy decisions to invest or divest in of wild coho salmon that had evolved for and hydrologic conditions (Hilborn et salmon fisheries, salmon recovery, and millennia, a 20-year period of high marine al. 2003; Beechie et al. 2006; Crozier and hatchery production around the North survival rates led fishery managers to mis- Zabel 2006; Rogers and Schindler 2008). Pacific. takenly believe that large-scale hatchery This response diversity imparts resilience • Exploring scenarios of future ocean production could sustain intense fisheries to human social systems, such as fisheries, productivity, linkages among ocean and (Lichatowich 1999). because they integrate across this ecologi- freshwater or terrestrial conditions, and Further, Oregon coho salmon provide cal heterogeneity (Hilborn et al. 2003). effects of changes in ocean, freshwater, a compelling example of situations where Focusing regional policy on “salmon land- or terrestrial conditions on salmon pro- favorable climatic conditions and high scapes” will also be necessary to account duction at local, regional, and SNPO survival in one habitat (e.g., ocean) can for the range of habitats used by salmon scales. This knowledge will be impor- obscure the degradation of other habitats over the course of their lives, including tant for creating a management regime migratory corridors (Martin 2006). In the (e.g., freshwater systems). For example, for cooperative use of the ecosystem Pacific Northwest, where salmon land- degradation of freshwater habitats can services of the SNPO. scapes are being developed most quickly, occur during periods of favorable ocean • Improving our understanding of how such protection of habitat may have to be conditions that produce high marine sur- climate change affects the metapo- especially aggressive to counteract ongoing vival rates. The degradation of freshwater pulation processes important to salmon effects of climate change (Ashley 2006). habitats is only detectable once marine evolutionary and ecological dynamics. conditions switch back to a low produc- • Refining genetic techniques to identify tivity regime and salmon populations are What science can do to improve stocks, and ways to efficiently imple- more dependent on high quality freshwa- salmon-climate policy ment the data generated by those ter habitat. Consequently, a ratchet effect techniques, in harvest management to can develop on population size and stock Science can play an important role in protect stock diversity in fisheries. diversity as climatically-driven conditions reducing key uncer- in the ocean oscillate between periods of tainties about cli- high and low quality (Lawson 1993). mate impacts to Although within-stock diversity hinders which future policy the development of accurate and generaliz- can adapt. Areas able long-term forecasts of climate impacts that are particu- on salmon at watershed scales, policies larly ripe for study that protect diverse landscapes and their and application to policy include: potential for diverse ecological responses So otronics are likely an effective means to hedge bets against future climate changes. Ecosystem

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 505 Conclusions ral trends in the production of Pacific Bulletin of the American Meteorological salmon. Canadian Journal of Fisheries Society 78:1069-1079. Predictions of the scope and exact and Aquatic Sciences 56:516-526. Martin, J. T. 2006. Salmon caught in the nature of biological responses to future cli- Beamish, R. J., R. M. Sweeting, and C. M. squeeze. Pages 411-424 in R. T. Lackey, D. Neville. 2008. Changing climate and the matic and habitat conditions will always H. Lach, and S. L. Duncan, eds. Salmon need to change our thinking about the 2100: the future of wild Pacific salmon. be subject to considerable uncertainty. management of Pacific salmon. American American Fisheries Society. Bethesda, However, we can be certain that climate Fisheries Society Special Publications, in will continue to change and biological press. Maryland. responses will be heterogeneous across a Beechie, T., E. Buhle, M. Ruckelshaus, Mueter, F. J., D. M. Ware, and R. M. Peterman. 2002. Spatial correlation variety of spatial and temporal scales. We A. Fullerton, and L. Holsinger. 2006. patterns in coastal environmental vari- face the challenge of developing manage- Hydrologic regime and the conservation of salmon life history diversity. Biological ables and survival rates of salmon in ment and conservation approaches that Conservation 130:560-572. the north-east Pacific Ocean. Fisheries are robust to substantial uncertainties Crozier, L., and R. W. Zabel. 2006. Climate Oceanography 11:205-218. about future conditions and capable of impacts at multiple scales: evidence for Pearcy, W. G. 1992. Ocean ecology of North responding to change. Simultaneously, we differential population responses in juve- Pacific salmonids. Washington Sea Grant, must hone our ability to identify a realis- nile Chinook salmon. Journal of Animal University of Washington Press, Seattle. tic range of alternative futures. While we Ecology 75: 1100-1109. Peterman, R. M., B. J. Pyper, M. F. Lapointe, Eggers, D. M. 2009. In press. Sustainability have focused on Pacific salmon, the issues M. D. Adkison, and C. J. Walters. of the Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim salmon we raise are not unique to these species. 1998. Patterns of covariation in survival fisheries. In C. Krueger, C. Zimmerman, Many of these same issues will challenge eds. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, rates of British Columbian and Alaskan policy to achieve sustained production and Maryland. sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) conservation of any wide-ranging species Hare, S. R., N. J. Matua, and R. C. Francis. stocks. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and as global and regional climate continue to 1999. Inverse production regimes: Alaska Aquatic Sciences 55:2503-2517. change. b and West Coast Pacific salmon. Fisheries Peterman, R. M., B. J. Pyper, and J. A. 24(1): 6-14. Grout. 2000. Comparison of parameter Acknowledgments Hilborn, R., T. P.Quinn, D. E. Schindler, estimation methods for detecting climate- and D. E. Rogers. 2003. Biocomplexity induced changes in productivity of Pacific and fisheries sustainability. Proceedings This perspective developed out of an inter- salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) Canadian of the National Acadamy of Sciences Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences national workshop convened at the National 100:6564-6568. 57:181-191. Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis Holt, C. A., M. B. Rutherford, and R. M. Pyper, B. J., F. J. Mueter, and R. M. (Santa Barbara, California) to understand Peterman. 2008. International coopera- tion among nation-states of the North Peterman. 2005. Across-species compari- the linkages between Pacific salmon eco- sons of spatial scales of environmental systems and changing climate. We thank S. Pacific Ocean on the problem of compe- tition among salmon for a common pool effects on survival rates of northeast Pacific Hare (University of Washington), P. Lawson of prey resources. Marine Policy 32:607- salmon. Transactions of the American (Oregon), and D. Eggers (Alaska Department 617. Fisheries Society 134:86-104. of Fish and Game) for providing data, C. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Rogers, L. A., and D. E. Schindler. 2008. Schwartz for helping develop Figure 1, and Climate Change). 2007. The science Asynchrony in population dynamics of R. Waples, R. Peterman, W. Duffy, and three basis. Contribution of Working Group I sockeye salmon in southwestern Alaska. anonymous reviewers for helpful comments to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Oikos 117:1578-1586. on the manuscript. The Gordon and Betty Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Ruggerone, G. T., E. Farley, J. Neilsen, Moore Foundation and the National Science Change. Cambridge University Press, and P. Hagen. 2005. Seasonal marine Cambridge. growth of Bristol Bay sockeye salmon Foundation provided financial support for this Kaeriyama, M., and R. R. Edpalina. 2004. (Oncorhynchus nerka) in relation to com- project. Evaluation of biological interaction between wild and hatchery population petition with Asian pink salmon (O. References for sustainable fisheries management of gorbuscha) and the 1977 regime shift. Pacific salmon. Pages 247-259 in K. M. Fisheries Bulletin 103:355-370. Ashley, K. 2006. Wild salmon in the 21st Leber, S. Kitada, H. L. Blankenship, T. Schindler, D. E., D. E. Rogers, M. D. century: energy, triage, and choices. Svåsand, eds. Stock enhancement and Scheuerell, and C. A. Abrey. 2005. Pages 71-88 in R. T. Lackey, D. H. Lach, sea ranching: developments, pitfalls and Effects of changing climate on zooplank- and S. L. Duncan, eds. Salmon 2100: the opportunities. 2nd Edition, Blackwell, ton and juvenile sockeye salmon growth future of wild Pacific salmon. American Oxford. in southwestern Alaska. Ecology 86:198- Fisheries Society. Bethesda, Maryland. Lawson, P. W. 1993. Cycles in ocean pro- 209. Battin, J., M. W. Wiley, M. H. Ruckelshaus, ductivity, trends in habitat quality, and Smith, T. B., and L. Bernatchez. 2007. N. Palmer, E. Korb, K. K. Bartz, and H. the restoration of salmon runs in Oregon. Evolutionary change in human-altered Imaki. 2007. Projected impacts of climate Fisheries 18(8):6-10. environments. Molecular Ecology 17:1- change on salmon habitat restoration. Lichatowich, J. 1999. Salmon without riv- 8. Proceedings of the National Academy of ers: a history of the Pacific salmon crisis. Sciences 104:6720-6725. Island Press. Washington, DC. Walters, C. J., and A. M. Parma. 1996. Beamish, R. J., D. J. Noakes, G. Mantua, N. J., S. R. Hare, Y. Zhang, J. Fixed exploitation rate strategies for A. McFarlane, L. Klyashtorin, M. Wallace, and R.C. Francis. 1997. coping with effects of climate change. V. V. Ivanov, and V. Kurashov. A Pacific interdecadal climate oscilla- Canadian Journal of Fisheries and 1999. The regime concept and natu- tion with impacts on salmon production. Aquatic Sciences 53:148-158.

506 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Column: Director's line

Gus Rassam AFS Executive Director Rassam can be contacted at Reconsider Changes to ESA [email protected].

On 11 August 2008, U.S. Department of the Interior In addition, the proposed regulations contain provisions Secretary Dirk Kempthorne announced proposed rules to limit the use of the Endangered Species Act in address- changes that would allow any federal agency to decide for ing climate change. They state that federal actions related itself whether protected species would be threatened by to projects that emit global warming pollution, such as agency projects. Many of these agencies do not have sig- permitting of a power plant or leasing of oil drilling rights, nificant biological expertise and often have clear conflicts of do not require review “because it is not possible to link the interest with the protection of species. emissions to impacts on specific listed species such as polar The American Fisheries Society regards these proposed bears.” changes to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as running counter to a long tradition of scientific peer review that has That proposal greatly dilutes the use of the ESA in regulat- worked to ensure the integrity of scientific opinion and, con- ing thermal discharges and greenhouse gases, and sets a sequently, provided guidelines for the protection of the most dangerous precedent for two reasons. First, it declares that vulnerable animals and plants in our environment. there is no link between emissions and impacts, when in fact This tradition is also clearly embedded in the legal and environmental scientists are convinced that greenhouse gas governmental history of the United States. Diluting the emissions raise air and water temperatures, thereby reduc- processes by which scientific opinion is formulated, by ing the extent and duration of ice cover, which reduces polar short-circuiting the peer review process, will result in reduced bear feeding opportunities through seal breathing holes protection for species often critical to ecosystem integrity. while increasing bear metabolic demands from increased Removing independent reviews increases the burden on swimming. Second, it sets a dangerous precedent for the ESA federal agencies and opens the door to unnecessary court and other laws and regulations by declaring no linkage when challenges that will ultimately result in more work for these that linkage, which may be complex, is clearly established agencies. through cause-effect, mechanistic, and spatially extensive statistical studies. If previous administrations had used that same logic, there would have been no linkage (or regulation) of sulfur and nitrogen emissions from power plants, acidifi- cation of surface waters, and loss of acid-sensitive fish and The Moving Box other aquatic species. And we would have had acidic, fishless lakes and streams throughout the United States rather the relatively healthy waters existing today. The worldwide credit crunch brought an The AFS urges the Department of Interior to reconsider unexpected side effect to the potential sale of the these proposed changes and to keep the independent review AFS headquarters campus—Nations Academy withdrew its zoning exemption application for the system intact. b Grosvenor estate, citing “current real estate market and financial considerations.” The land sale was contingent on the zoning exemption. Another proposed Nations Academy school for New York City was also canceled. The Renewable Natural Resources Foundation and the Society of American Foresters, co-owners of the land where AFS holds a 99-year lease on its headquarters, are said to be weighing options for reducing the scope of the recent historical designation of certain buildings on the property. Although the AFS offices now have a temporary reprieve, a future sale has not been ruled out, especially as the suburb of Bethesda braces for the upcoming absorption of Walter Reed Army Medical Center into EcoAnalysts Bethesda Naval Hospital just a few blocks away.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 507 AWARDS: 2008 AFS AWARD WInners

The following award winners were honored at the AFS 138th Annual Meeting in Ottawa, Ontario for their contributions to the AFS, to their profession, and to resource conservation.

THE PRESIDENT’S FISHERY CONSERVATION AWARD Edwin P. "Phil" Pister, retired, accepts the President’s Fishery Conservation Award from Mary Fabrizio. Eighteen years ago Pister retired from the California Department of Fish and Game with 38 years of service. In 1969 he was instrumental in saving the last population (800 individuals in two buckets) of Owens pupfish (Cyprinodon radiosus) from extinction. He was instrumental in the 1976 U.S. Supreme Court order curtailing freshwater pumping in Ash Meadows to preserve the last refuge for the Devil's Hole pupfish. In 1987 he engineered the return of the extirpated Colorado River cutthroat trout to Bench Lake in the Rocky Mountain National Park. He was a key player in the creation of California’s Golden Trout Wilderness and has worked toward the preservation of the species for which it was named. Pister served as first chairperson and executive secretary of the Desert Fishes Council. He continues to participate in advancing the fields of fishery conservation and environmental ethics at the local, regional, and international levels. He is currently as an associate editor for the North American Journal of Fisheries Management.

AWARD OF EXCELLENCE John M. Casselman, adjunct professor at Queen’s University and recently retired from the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, accepts the Award of Excellence from Mary Fabrizio. He has also held cross- appointments at several other universities, particularly Trent, Guelph, Waterloo, and McGill. His research and expertise include the impact of climate and climate change on fish populations and community dynamics, the effects of cormorants on fish and fisheries, the impacts of invasive species on native communities, and factors affecting fish populations and fisheries such as the declining abundance of American eels in the St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario. He was instrumental in developing the Calcified Structure Age Interpretation System and Calcified Structure Age-Growth Data Extraction Software that standardizes the interpretation of calcified structures for age and growth, and facilitates electronic storage of the data. He mentored and supervised fisheries students, including masters and doctoral students, through his academic positions with Trent University and Queen’s University and served on many postgraduate committees.

WILLIAM E. RICKER RESOURCE CONSERVATION AWARD Robin S. Waples, National Marine Fisheries Service, accepts the William E. Ricker Resource Conservation Award from Don Jackson and Mary Fabrizio. He led coast-wide Endangered Species Act status reviews and helped initiate and lead a scientifically-defensible and politically- viable approach to recovery planning for ESA-listed species across the country. He advanced the concept of Evolutionarily Significant Unit and performed applied research with worldwide impacts in the field of conservation biology. He wrote over 180 critically important and highly cited journal articles, technical reports, and book chapters. His extensive service in manuscript review, which includes the journals Conservation Biology, Evolutionary Applications, and Conservation Genetics, has been invaluable in "guarding the gates" of normative statistical practice and raising standards. As mentor to numerous young scientists, he emphasized a thoughtful, reasoned, and broad approach to the application of conservation science. Recently at the Northwest Fisheries Science Center he helped initiate and manage an internal competitive grants program for young scientists.

508 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g CARL R. SULLIVAN FISHERY CONSERVATION AWARD—"The Sully" MERITORIOUS SERVICE AWARD Ole A. Mathisen is posthumously awarded the Carl R. Sullivan Fishery Roger A. Rulifson, East Carolina University, receives the Meritorious Conservation Award. Terry Quinn, University of Alaska Fairbanks, and Service Award from Mary Fabrizio. For over 30 years Rulifson has served Mary Fabrizio display a photo of his hand-carved award. From 1955 to AFS as a mentor of students and young professionals, a partner and 1982 Mathisen was a professor the University of Washington and from collaborator with other professionals, an elected officer, a committee 1983 to 1997 he was dean at the School of Fisheries and Science at the chair, a journal reviewer, and as an associate editor. He helped plan University of Alaska Juneau. As professor emeritus he completed a white the 1980 "Common Strategies of Anadromous/Catadromous Fishes" paper reviewing natural resources that could be impacted by offshore and the 2007 "Challenges for Diadromous Fishes in a Dynamic Global mineral leases in Bristol Bay and a field study guide on sockeye salmon Environment" symposia. At the 2000 AFS Annual Meeting, he helped for middle school students. He helped to establish the regulations and to provide the first CD-rom version of abstracts, web-based abstract international negotiating strategy that brought Bristol Bay sockeye salmon submissions, and digital projection for presentations. Since 1998 he has been advisor to the AFS East Carolina University Student Subunit back from the brink of destruction in 1973. He invested a lifetime in undergraduate and graduate students, directing thesis and dissertation establishing the credibility of principles of fishery conservation not only research, and acting as mentor. He has encouraged and enabled with students and fellow academicians, but especially with students to become more involved in the community through service processors, fishery regulators, and fishers. His dedication to conservation and educational opportunities. laid much of the foundation for today’s culture of management in state and federal institutions of Alaska.

DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARDS

Michael L. Brown, South Dakota State University, and Christopher Section president and following the southeast Asia tsunami, he lead S. Guy, Montana Cooperative Fishery Research Unit, received a development of the process to support the AFS relief efforts, which Distinguished Service Award (Al Zale, left photo, accepting on their serves as a model for similar efforts. behalf). Guy and Brown were honored for co-editing the new book Analysis and Interpretation of Freshwater Fisheries Data. Probably the Nancy Leonard, Michigan State University, is represented by Chris editing of no previous AFS textbook has ever involved so much work and Goddard (right photo), who receives her Distinguished Service Award this text will likely become one of the most useful and referenced texts on her behalf. She excels at literature review, synthesis, and writing in fishery science. Guy said, "Mike and I are extremely honored to have skills in organizing disparate information, and she is recognized for her received the American Fisheries Society Distinguished Service award. outstanding contributions of time and energy for efforts in researching, Foremost, we recognize the efforts of the many people that made writing, and editing of the AFS White Paper on “Impacts of Lead this book a reality. It is the hard work and dedication of the authors, Ammunition and on Natural Resources,” produced in peer reviewers, statistical editors, technical editors, and AFS books partnership with the Wildlife Society. department that made our idea come to life. Everyone that worked on this book project deserves kudos for their distinguished service." Donna Turgeon (not pictured), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, retired, received a Distinguished Service Award for T. Douglas Beard Jr. (center photo), USGS, receives a Distinguished her skills, commitment, and dedication to AFS and particularly for her Service Award from Mary Fabrizio. Beard's service to AFS include contributions coordinating 39 authors to produce the most authoritative leadership roles as an Unit officer within the Society, as a symposium collection of scientific and common names of crustaceans in North sponsor, a presenter, and committee member. Recently Beard served America, Common and Scientific Names of Aquatic Invertebrates from as president of both the Computer User Section (2001–2003) and the the United States and Canada—Crustaceans Second Edition, AFS Special International Fisheries Section (2002–2006). As International Fisheries Publication 31, in 2005.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 509 The Class of 1959 GOLDEN MEMBERS AFS honors individuals who have been members for 50 years.

W. L. Bridges Bradford E. Brown Gilbert V. Chambers Johnie H. Crance EXCELLENCE IN FISHERIES EDUCATION AWARD EXCELLENCE IN PUBLIC OUTREACH AWARD Stephen Di Angelo Christopher C. Kohler, retired, Fisheries and Craig Springer, fish biologist with the U.S. James P. Fry Illinois Aquaculture Center and Department Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), receives the Charles R. Hazel of Zoology, Southern Illinois University Excellence in Public Outreach Award from Mary Norval F. Netsch Carbondale, receives the Excellence in Fisheries Fabrizio. In the last decade Springer served as Robert C. Summerfelt Education Award from Mary Fabrizio. Kohler mentored over 35 graduate students who Carl C. Widmer editor of Eddies magazine and he authored matriculated to posts in government agencies, about 400 popular articles that communicate the private sector, and academia. He has the fisheries conservation work of the USFWS taught courses ranging from ichthyology a t t e n d e d t h e a n n u a l m e e t i n g in o t t a w a through advanced aquaculture. In 2005 he to the American public in more that 35 Vaughn C. Anthony was president of AFS and in the 1990s he was periodicals including Southwest John H. Helle president of the Education Section of AFS. He magazine, Country Living, North American contributed to the Education Section’s Skinner , the New York Times, New York Walter T. Momot travel award as well as many other student Geoffrey Power opportunities within AFS. He also co-edited Conservationist, Women in Natural Resources, two editions of Inland Fisheries Management in Field & Stream, Outdoor Life, In-Fisherman, North America. and ESPNOutdoors.com.

J. FRANCES ALLEN SCHOLARSHIP WINNER J. FRANCES ALLEN SCHOLARSHIP Michelle Staudinger (not pictured), a Ph.D. Melissa Wuellner, South Dakota State RunnerS-Up student at the University of Massachusetts University, wins the J. Francis Allen Scholarship, Runner-up Karen Murchie, Carleton Amherst in the School of Marine Sciences, presented by Mary Fabrizio. Wuellner is a University, receives her J. Francis Allen Department of Natural Resources Ph.D. student advised by David Willis in the Scholarship Runner-up Award from Mary Conservation, received a J. Francis Allen Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences Fabrizio. Murchie is an NSERC Ph.D. student Scholarship Runner-up Award. Francis Juanes at South Dakota State University. She is vice in the Department of Biology at Carleton advises her dissertation project, which focuses president of the Dakota Student Subunit and University in Ottawa, Canada. She is also a on evaluating predator-prey body-size and president of the Education Section Student member of the Flats Ecology and Conservation behavioral relationships between squid and Subsection. Melissa’s researches stream and riverine ecology, conservation of non-game Program at the Cape Eleuthera Institute in the their predators in the northwest Atlantic fishes, predator-prey interactions, and reservoir Bahamas where she conducts her field studies Ocean. management. Her dissertation research under the co-supervision of Steven Cooke and assesses competition between walleye (Sander Andy Danylchuk. Her dissertation research is vitreus) and smallmouth bass (Micropterus focused on linking organismal biology with dolomieu) and how the dynamics of gizzard environmental variability and ecosystem shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) potentially processes in tropical tidal flats systems. influence competition.

510 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g OUTSTANDING CHAPTER AWARD— OUTSTANDING STUDENT SUBUNIT AWARD Outstanding chapter award— Large Chapter (100 members or more) The Palouse Student Subunit of the Idaho Small Chapter (less than 100 members) The California Nevada Chapter, represented Chapter, represented by Faculty Advisor The South Carolina Chapter received the by Lourdes Rugge, receives the Outstanding Christine Moffitt, receives the Outstanding Outstanding Small Chapter Award. The Large Chapter Award from Mary Fabrizio. The Student Subunit Award from Mary Fabrizio. Chapter's meetings and workshops are widely Chapter, along with the Western Division, For 30 years the Subunit fostered professional recognized as outstanding professional, organized and hosted the Society’s 137th development of students by scheduling guest educational, and outreach events and Annual Meeting in San Francisco. Chapter speakers and educational opportunities such as considered among the most significant members garnered in-kind and financial fish tagging clinics, and organizing volunteer events for personal interactions between support for the conference from state, field activities including kids fishing events. fisheries professional in the state. Students federal, local, private, and non-profit entities The Subunit raises funds through a annual have traditionally had a prominent presence across the state. The Chapter also publishes “wild game feed” sale and lunchtime soup Pisces, a quarterly newsletter that is posted at meetings and are actively encouraged to feeds at the College of Natural Resources. At on their website and mailed electronically to participate and regularly win the "Jack Bayless" meetings the students volunteer for duties all members and contains information about best paper competition, which is also open Chapter activities, advocacy efforts, emerging such as lights, timers, poster session set-up, to professionals. Their up-to-date website regional fishery issues, research results, and registration, social/auction assistance, audio- communicates information about Chapter policy updates. visual equipment, and taping and uploading activities. plenary session video.

JOHN E. SKINNER MEMORIAL FUND Recipients Honorable Mentions The following graduate students or exceptional undergraduate students (not in the order pictured) receive the John E. Skinner Memorial Cindy Chu, Trent University Wes Bouska, Kansas State University Fund monetary travel awards to attend the AFS Robin DeBruyne, Cornell University David Caroffino, University of Alaska Annual Meeting. Troy Farmer, Auburn University Stephen Midway, North Carolina State Scott Favrot, North Carolina State University University Ben Neely, University of Nebraska Travis Neebling, Iowa State University John Niles, West Virginia University Ryan Utz, University of Maryland Stephen Ranney, South Dakota State University Jamie Roberts, Virginia Tech Joshua Schloesser, Kansas State University Ryan Woodland, University of Maryland

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 511 STUDENT WRITING CONTEST THE BEST PAPER IN THE JOURNAL THE BEST PAPER IN THE NORTH Connie O’Connor, Carleton University, won OF AQUATIC ANIMAL HEALTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AQUACULTURE the Student Writing Contest for her article, K. Choi, D. W. Lehmann, C. A. Harms, and Gerald L. Kurten, Aaron Barkoh, Loraine "What Doesn’t Kill Fish Doesn’t Necessarily J. M. Law won Best Paper in the Journal of T. Fries and Drew C. Begley won Best Paper Make them Stronger: Understanding the Long- Aquatic Animal Health for "Acute Hypoxia- in the North American Journal of Aquaculture term Population Consequences of Stress." The reperfusion Triggers Immunocompromise in for "Combined Nitrogen and Phosphorus award recognizes articles which communicate Nile Tilapia." Tom Kwak accepts the award Fertilization for Controlling the Toxigenic Algae the value of fisheries science to the general from Mary Fabrizio on the authors' behalf. Prymnesium parvum." Gary Saul accepts the public. award from Mary Fabrizio on the authors' behalf. Karen Murchie (photo on page 520), was runner-up with "Stalking the Flats in the Name of Science." Both winning papers will be published in an upcoming issue of Fisheries.

THE ROBERT L. KENDALL BEST THE MERCER PATRIARCHE BEST PAPER PAPER IN TRANSACTIONS OF THE IN THE NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY OF FISHERIES MANAGEMENT Thomas R. Whittier, Robert M. Hughes, M. J. Catalano, M. A. Bozek, and T. D. Gregg A. Lomnicky and David V. Peck Pellet win The Mercer Patriarche Best Paper win the Best Paper in the Transacations of in the North American Journal of Fisheries the American Fisheries Society Award for Management for "Effects of Dam Removal "Fish and Amphibian Tolerance Values and on Fish Assemblage Structure and Spatial an Assemblage Tolerance Index for Streams Distributions in the Baraboo River, Wisconsin. and Rivers in the Western USA."Hughes Catalano and Bozek accept the award from and Lomnicky accept their award from Mary Mary Fabrizio. Fabrizio.

512 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Top AFS Membership Recruiter Anna George (center) is congratulataed by Membership Coordinator Eva Przygodzki and Membership Assistant Juanita Flick.

ROBERT F. HUTTON JUNIOR FISHERIES BIOLOGY SCHOLARS Hutton Scholars Carly Fairbanks and Mariah Taylor receive congratulations from Mary Fabrizio (center) and Bill Franzin (right). They represent the 35 Hutton Scholars of 2008. Taylor assisted the Thousand Islands Biological Station with an ongoing study that focused on muskellunge and northern pike population dynamics in the St. Lawrence River. Fairbanks participated in a study to determine the vegetation characteristics of juvenile muskellunge nursery habitat. Eric Reynolds (left), Thousand Islands Biological Station, mentored both students. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO HOSTS FOR THE ANNUAL MEETINGOF THE AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY WHEREAS, the 138th Annual Meeting of the American Fisheries Society convened in Canada’s capital city, Ottawa on August 17th to the 21st 2008, hosted by the Ontario Chapter and “Team AFS 2008”; WHEREAS, our hosts provided a thoughtful and progressive theme of “Fisheries in Flux: How do we ensure our Sustainable Future?” and facilities in a fun and beautiful setting for attendees and their families and an extensive program including 36 symposia, 22 contributed sessions, 201 posters, and numerous section meetings; WHEREAS, our hosts provided plenary sessions and speakers addressing issues affecting fisheries and fisheries professionals in the workplace in this ever changing environment; WHEREAS, we were able to mingle with our colleagues at the “ice breaker” on the terrace of the Congress Centre, over looking the beautiful Rideau Canal and Parliament Hill, the Nations capital; WHEREAS, the continuing education committee provided 10 short courses covering Information-theoretic approaches, GIS from the basics to advanced, program R, leadership skills, side-scan sonar technology, habitat modeling and in-stream modeling; WHEREAS, students were able to interact with professionals at the student-mentor luncheon, student colloquium and the “Savour Ottawa” social at the vibrant Byward market with live music, great food, and beverages; WHEREAS, we convened for a social banquet at the Canadian Museum of Civilization in Gatineau, Quebec, Canada’s largest and most popular cultural institution on the shores of the Ottawa River, where we viewed exhibits and 43 authentic totem poles showcasing the history and culture of Canada’s native peoples; The Fisheries Society of the WHEREAS, we were able to enjoy the surroundings of the conference via boat and bicycle tours, take in the local British isleS Outstanding Young native culture on Turtle Island, go spelunking, and visit the many museums, such as the unique Diefenbunker, Researcher MEDAL the four story underground museum and government buildings; Steven Cooke, Carleton University, accepts NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the membership of the American Fisheries Society, having the Fisheries Society of the British enjoyed the hospitality of Ottawa, Ontario, extends its hearty appreciation and thanks to our hosts, the Ontario isles (FSBI) Medal for Outstanding Young Chapter of the American Fisheries Society, to the General Chair Dave Maraldo and his Planning Committee; Researcher from FSBI Treasurer Gordon Copp. to the Symposia Organizer Mark Ridgway, the Contributed Papers Organizer Nigel Lester, and the Poster Organizer Tim Haxton and their committee members.

AFS Past President Jennifer Nielsen accepts Maraldo, Ridgway, and Lester, receive certificates of AFS's appreciation from Mary a bound volume of Fisheries magazine from Fabrizio. Mary Fabrizio.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 513 2008 AFS Section Awards

Equal Opportunities Section Estuaries Section Mentor Award: Student Travel Award: Patrick Kocovsky, USGS Great Lakes Science Center Joseph Charles Ballenger, Justine Woodward and Student Travel Award: John Daniel Lopez Julie Harris, North Carolina State University Nancy Foster Habitat Conservation Award: Beth Holbrook, University of Minnesota-Duluth Peter S. Wellenberger Heidi Lewis, Southern Illinois University Fisheries Management Section Ashlee Pitts, Kansas State University Fisheries Management Hall of Excellence: Elizabeth Romero Hernandez, Thomas W. Gengerke, Howard A. Tanner and Richard R. Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Whitney Utah State University Sarah Seidel, Award of Excellence: Caitlin O’Brien, Oberlin College, Ohio Ian Cowx and Robert Arlinghaus Kristen Homel, Montana State University Genetics Section Education Section: James E. Wright Award: Best Student Poster Award at the Andrea Drauch and Joseph DiBattista 2007 Annual Meeting in San Francisco, California Stevan Phelps Memorial Award: Harold Geiger, Ivan Winner: “Integrating Basic and Applied Research in Wang, Pat Malecha, Kyle Hebert, William Smoker, and Determining whether Competition Exists between Two Top- Anthony Gharrett for their article "What Causes Variability level Predators in South Dakota Missouri River reservoirs” by in Pink Salmon Family Size" in Transactions of the American Melissa Wuellner, South Dakota State University Fisheries Society, 136:1688-698. AFS/SEA Grant Outstanding Student Paper at the 2007 Annual Meeting in San Francisco, California Marine Fisheries Section Winner: “Movement of Anglers, Sediment Transport, and the Steven Berkeley Marine Conservation Fellowship: Adam Peer Implications for Carrying Aquatic Nuisance Species” by Honorable Mention: Kiza Gates, Montana State University Mandy Karnauskas and Keith Dunton Paper Honorable Mentions Student Travel Award: “Uncertainties in Population Dynamics and Outcomes of Nuno Prista, Joseph Facendola, Ivan Mateo, Lynn Regulations in Sockeye Salmon Fisheries: Implications for Waterhouse Management” OScar Sette AWARD: Kevin Bailey Carrie Holt, Simon Fraser University “Influence of Landscape structure on Genetic Structure of Socioeconomic Section Bull Trout in Glacier National Park, Montana” A.Stephen Weithman Award: Michael Meeuwig, Montana State University Jody Simoes, Michigan State University

Marine FISHERIES Section AwARDs FIsheries Management Adam Peer (left photo) receives the Steven Berkeley Marine Conservation Fellowship from Sue Sogard Section AWARD OF EXCELENCE at the Marine Fisheries Section business meeting. Nuno Prista, Joseph Facendola, Ivan Mateo, Robert Arlinghaus receives the Lynn Waterhouse, and Kevin Bailey display their Marine Fisheries Section Travel Awards Award of Excellence from Ron while Mandy Karnauskas and Keith Dunton display Honorable Mention Certificates. Essig.

514 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Continued from page 484 population consumes more and more challenges to be explored in FAO’s fish and small farmers in poor coun- report include the environmental tries face difficulties in exporting their impacts of , food safety through partnerships that foster fish produce. and antibiotic use, and the impact habitat conservation and improve the The FAO expressed that the aqua- which climate change may have on quality of life for the U.S. people. This culture sector will need to produce legislation leverages federal, state, aquaculture. 80.5 million metric tons per year just and private funds to build regional to maintain current per capita fish partnerships aimed at addressing the National Fish Habitat Board consumption. In 2006, the sector nation’s biggest fisheries problems. meeting produced 51.7 million tons, or nearly The companion bill, the National The board of the National Fish half of the estimated 100 million Fish Habitat Conservation Act of Habitat Action Plan held a meet- fish consumed worldwide. The need 2008 (H.R. 7150) was introduced ing in Arlington, Virginia, from 7–8 for more fish from aquaculture has into the House on 26 September. October. The first day of the meeting been heightened, the agency noted, Congressmen Ron Kind (D-WI) and focused on an update on a number because so-called traditional capture Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD) introduced of ongoing board activities, includ- fisheries from the world’s seas, lakes, the bill as a comprehensive strategy ing the activities of the legislative and rivers have reached a plateau in to allocate conservation dollars for and the science subcommittees. The terms of production. effective restoration of our national second day of the meeting continued waterways. The House version In addition, the FAO stated that the with the discussion and adoption of nearly mirrors the Senate version. rapid growth of the aquaculture sec- tor seems to be slowing, with previ- goals. It also contained an update given by the communications director Fish farming may not keep up ous yearly growth rates of over 10% with global demand from 1985 to 1995 declining to 7% in and presentations from two candidate In October 2008, the United the following decade. FAO has noted Fish Habitat Partnerships (FHP), the Nations Food and Agriculture a series of issues facing the future of Great Lakes Basin Candidate FHP and Organization (FAO) expressed con- fish farming in a report that will be the Fishers and Farmers Candidate cerns that the aquaculture industry presented to countries attending a FHP. More information about the may struggle to meet future world meeting of its aquaculture subcom- National Fish Habitat Action Plan can demand for fish as a rising global mittee in Puerto Varas, Chile. Other be found at www.fishhabitat.org. b

Floy Tag

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 515 CALENDAR: FISHERIES EVENTS

More events listed at www.fisheries.org click "Who We Are" click "Calendar"

Date eVent Name Nov 14-16 third International Bonefish and Tarpon Symposium: Research and Conservation for the Future Dania Beach and Islamorada, Florida [email protected] Nov 18-20 colorado River Basin Science and Resource Management Symposium—Coming Together: Cooridination of Science and Restoration Activities for the Colorado River Ecosystem Scottsdale, Arizona www.watereducation.org Nov 19-22 11th International Conference on Shellfish Restoration Charleston, South Carolina www.scseagrant.org/Content/?cid=297 Nov 21-22 aquaMedit 2008: Using Technology in Aquaculture and Fisheries to Produce Safe Food for the Consumers Athens, Greece http://connect.to/pasti Nov 23-25 international Symposium on the Bering-Aleutian Salmon International Surveys: climate Change, Production Trends, and Carrying Capacity of Pacific Salmon in the Bering Sea and Adjacent Waters Seattle, Washington www.napafc.org Dec 2-4 western States Tourism Policy Council Gateway Conference—Gateway Today: balancing Conservation and Community in an Age of Diversity, Change, and Challenge Albuquerque, New Mexico www.newmexico.org/WSTPC Dec 3-4 11th Flatfish Biology Conference Westbrook, Connecticut http://mi.nefsc.noaa.gov/flatfishbiologyworkshop, [email protected], 203/882-6549 Dec 8-10 National Council for Science and the Environment's Ninth National Conference on Science, Policy and the Environment Washington, DC www.ncseonline.org/conference/biodiversity Dec 14-17 midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference

Columbus, Ohio www.2008MWFWC.com 2 0 0 9

Jan 13-14 Lake Mead Science Symposium Las Vegas, Nevada www.lakemeadsymposium.org

State of the Salmon

516 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g To submit upcoming events for inclusion on the AFS Web site Calendar, send event name, dates, city, state/province, web address, and contact information to cworth@ fisheries.org. (If space is available, events will also be printed in Fisheries magazine.)

Jan 15-18 spring Meeting of the Southern Division and Louisiana Chapter of the AFS New Orleans, Louisiana www.sdafs.org/meetings Jan 22-23 great Lakes Urban Habitat Restoration Symposium Chicago, Illinois www.glfc.org/urbanrestore Jan 27-31 texas Chapter of AFS and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department—Fisheries and Harmful Algae: Can They Co-Exist? Fort Worth, Texas [email protected] Feb 2-5 state of the Salmon Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada www.stateofthesalmon.org/conference2009 Feb 15-18 aquaculture America 2009 seattle, Washington www.was.org March 10-13 25th Wakefield FisheriesS ymposium: Biology and Management of Exploited Crab Populations under Climate Change Anchorage, Alaska http://seagrant.uaf.edu/conferences/2009/wakefield-crab/ index.html Mar 30-Apr 3 improving the Ecological Status of Fish Communities in Inland Waters: International Symposium and EFI+ Workshop, Hull, United Kingdom www.hull.ac.uk/hifi/events/index.html May 3-7 western Division Annual Meeting—Evolution of the Western Landscape: Balancing Habitat, Land, and Water Management for Fish Albuquerque, New Mexico www.aznmfishsoup.org/wdafs09/index.htm

January 27–31, 2009 Radisson Fort Worth Fossil Creek Hotel Fort Worth, Texas USA

The Texas Chapter of the American Fisheries Society (TCAFS) and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) cordially invite all American Fisheries Society members, fisheries and water quality professionals, harmful algae experts, academia, governmental agency staff, river authorities, and other stakeholders to attend this combined conference of the annual TCAFS meeting and an International Symposium on golden alga Prymnesium parvum coordinated by the TPWD Golden Alga Task Force. The meeting and symposium will be held near downtown historic Fort Worth and the Fort Worth Stockyards National Historic District. Golden Alga Symposium Texas Chapter of the Amercian The TPWD Golden Alga Task Force has invited (University of Texas), Dr. Jim Grover (University Fisheries Society Annual Meeting international, national, and Texas researchers of Texas), Dr. Dan Roelke (Texas A&M The TCAFS will host the golden alga and workers to present their most recent University), Dr. Bryan Brooks (Baylor University, symposium in conjunction with its annual research in management, control, bloom Texas), Dr. Kevin Schug (University of Texas) meeting and banquet. The meeting will dynamics, toxicity, and genetics of golden alga. and Dr. Johannes Hagstrom (University include a special contributed session for Manuscripts are to be published as a special of Texas Marine Science Institute). TPWD inland and coastal harmful algal bloom symposium in the Journal of the American golden alga researchers will also present topics as well as a general fisheries session. Water Resources Association. The keynote topics on the Texas experience including The meeting will also feature the lively speaker will be Dr. Don Anderson (Woods statewide distribution and genetics, and annual raffle and banquet, student awards, Hole Oceanographic Institute). Confirmed recent developments for control in small Texas fisheries workers awards, student/ international and national speakers include Dr. impoundments. The symposium will wrap up mentor luncheon, student social, past Edna Graneli (Sweden), Dr. Wenche Eikrem with a panel discussion to explore present and president’s breakfasts, and the annual (Norway), Dr. Linda Medlin (Germany), Dr. John future avenues of understanding and control business meeting. Rogers (Clemson University), Dr. John LaClaire of this harmful alga. Combined Poster Session Socials, Activities and Attractions Researchers are also invited to submit posters Conference registration includes Worth Fossil Creek Hotel is within 5 miles for the combined poster session for all admittance to exhibits, all breaks, Tuesday of the unique Texas experience of the Texas Chapter AFS and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department fisheries and harmful algae topics. Student afternoon mixer, Wednesday lunch, Fort Worth Stockyards, Bill Bobs Texas, members of the TCAFS are eligible for the Thursday dinner and banquet, and Friday and Sun Dance Square for after-hours annual best poster award. afternoon social. The Radisson Forth entertainment.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 517 Obituary: Rich Cailteux

Rich Cailteux, 44, a freshwater fisheries research biologist, passed away 16 September after an extended illness. Cailteux received a B.S. from the University of Wisconsin—Stevens Point and an M.S. from the University of Florida—Gainesville. He started as a biolo- gist with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) in 1988, and served as a project rivers. Thus, his broad interests and enthusiasm resulted leader in north Florida since 1991. in substantial research in lakes, reservoirs, and streams. Cailteux‘s work included all species of freshwater sport Cailteux will be remembered by his colleagues for his hard fish throughout Florida. He led two reservoir drawdowns work ethic, his efficiency in completing projects, his profes- of Lake Talquin for habitat enhancement, and developed sionalism, and the high quality of his work. a catfish monitoring and research program in the north- Cailteux was a leader at both the state and national ern part of the state. Cailteux worked to understand food levels within the American Fisheries Society. He was an habits of centrarchids in Florida lakes, and he performed active member of AFS since 1986 and past president of the important efforts to understand the distribution and abun- Florida Chapter. He helped lead a committee of scientists dance of Suwannee bass (Micropterus notius) in Florida from around the United States that completed a compre- hensive evaluation of the use of rotenone for research and management efforts. The committee’s work spanned several years and culminated in a book, in which Cailteux served as editor, and a user manual that he coauthored. He also authored numerous technical articles and peer- reviewed journal papers regarding fisheries research and management. Cailteux built partnerships that will continue his con- tributions to fisheries science for years to come. He was a leader in developing a collaborative research program between the Florida FWC and the University of Florida’s fisheries program. He helped many graduate students with field collections, data discussions, and insight into the structure and function of Florida’s aquatic ecosystems. He was an exemplary role model and mentor for young biologists and students, and was held in the highest regard by his colleagues. On a personal level, he loved sports and he will be remembered as being very competitive when it came to athletics. Our friend will be missed by many. Cailteux is survived by his wife, Lynn, and his two sons, Brian and Brandon, whom he always talked about with great pride. Many of Cailteux’s friends and colleagues have asked about making contributions to help his two sons. Contributions can be made by sending a check made out to Jim Estes that has “Rich Cailteux Memorial Fund” writ- ten in the memo line. Contributions will be used to pur- chase savings bonds for Brian and Brandon. Checks may be mailed to Jim Estes, 9894 Deer Lake East, Tallahassee, FL Little River Research and Design 32312.

—W. Porak, M. Allen, S. Crawford, and R. Taylor

518 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Contents www.fi sheries.org/mcf.

Now Accepting Papers! Marine and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science

A NEW JOURNAL FROM THE AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY (AFS) THAT PUBLISHES ORIGINAL AND INNOVATIVE RESEARCH.

This open-access, online journal is an international venue for studies of marine, coastal, and estuarine fi sheries. The journal encourages contributors to identify and address challenges in population dynamics, assessment techniques and management approaches, fi sh and shellfi sh biology, human dimensions and socioeconomics, and ecosystem metrics to improve fi sheries science in general and make informed predictions and decisions.

THE NOTABLE FEATURES OF THIS JOURNAL INCLUDE: • Multimedia submissions are encouraged. • Rapid review and publication of papers widely and freely available to the public. • Maintaining the high quality associated with the long tradition of AFS peer-reviewed publishing program. • Worldwide access to ground-breaking science. • Special issues dedicated to emerging issues and hot topics. • A distinguished group of editors in the various disciplines of marine and coastal fi sheries science and management. • A forum section dedicated to constructive, timely, and lively debate on key issues in marine and coastal fi sheries. • Publication fee subsidy for researchers in developing countries and AFS members.

Submit your papers today!

To view the complete mission statement, read about the editorial board members, learn more about the publication fee structure, and view the guide for authors please visit www.fisheries.org/mcf

EDITORIAL BOARD

Don Noakes, Canada (Editor-in-Chief) Michelle Heupel, Australia Louis Botsford, USA Suam Kim, South Korea Richard Brill, USA Kristi Miller, Canada Howard I. Browman, Norway Anthony Overton, USA Anthony Charles, Canada Ana Parma, Argentina Paul Dayton, USA Kenneth Rose, USA Syma Ebbin, USA Carl Walters, Canada Tim Essington, USA

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 519 AFS Annual 2nd CALL FOR PAPERS

Biodiversity Fact

Did you know that the 2009 AFS meeting in Nashville will be held less than 80 km from the Duck River, which harbors one of the greatest diversities in the world of fish and macroinvertebrate species? With only one large reservoir in its headwaters, the Duck River is the longest free-flowing stretch of river in Tennessee and is home to more than 150 fish species, 54 mussel species, and 22 species of aquatic snails. The Duck River was recently designated a State Scenic River and many organizations and individuals are committed to protecting it, and the species it harbors, from the threats posed by changes in land use, storm-water runoff, sewage treatment facilities, and

Student Symposium The AFS Education section will once again be sponsoring a Student Symposium. Students interested in being chosen to participate and compete for Best Student Paper and Best Student Poster should read about the process before going online to submit an abstract: Sutton, T. M., D. L. Parrish, and J. R. Jackson. 2007. Time for a change: revision of the process for judging student presentations at the Annual Meeting. Fisheries 32(1):42-43. Questions should be directed to Jim Peterson (Chair, Best Student Paper Award Committee; [email protected]; 706/542-1166) or Rich Fulford (Chair, Best Student Poster Award Committee; [email protected]; 228/872-4282).

The endangered Birdwing pearly mussel (Lemiox rimosus) is one of the fifty-plus mussel species inhabiting the Duck River in central Tennessee.

General Information Symposium Aquatic resource professionals are invited to submit symposia proposals The Program Committee invites proposals for symposia. Topics must be and abstracts for papers in a range of topics and disciplines. Participation by of general interest to AFS members. Topics related to the meeting theme will scientists at all levels and backgrounds, especially students, is encouraged. receive priority. Symposium organizers are responsible for recruiting presenters, The scientific program includes two types of sessions: Symposia (oral and soliciting their abstracts, and directing them to submit their abstracts through the poster presentations that focus on a single topic) and Contributed Papers (oral AFS online abstract submission form. A symposium should include a minimum of and poster presentations on any relevant topic). 10 presentations and we encourage organizers to limit their requests to one-day Oral presentations are limited to 20 minutes (15 minutes for presentation plus 5 minutes for speaker introduction and questions). All oral presenters symposia (about 20 oral presentations). Regular oral presentations are limited are expected to deliver PowerPoint presentations. Presenters must bring their to 20 minutes, but double time slots (i.e., 40 minutes) may be offered to keynote PowerPoint file to the meeting on CD or USB flash memory stick by 7 p.m. the speakers. Symposia with less than 15 or more than 20 presentations are strongly evening before their presentation. Laptop computers and LCD projectors will be discouraged. provided and technicians will be available to help. Symposium proposals must be submitted by 9 January Traditionally, symposia have been dominated by oral presentations and 2009 via e-mail to Mark Bevelhimer ([email protected]) with the sometimes supplemented by posters. The Nashville ‘09 Program Committee is proposal attached in the correct format in MS Word or WordPerfect; please considering following the example set at the Ottawa ‘08 meeting and allowing contact Mark Bevelhimer if you do not receive confirmation by January 16. The “Speed Presentations” coupled with posters to shorten the time required for symposia. This new format elevates the profile of symposium posters through Program Committee will review all symposium proposals and notify organizers of a “speed presentation subsession” that provides a time slot for short (i.e., 3 acceptance or refusal by 6 February 2009. If accepted, organizers must submit minute) oral presentations, followed by dedicated viewing of symposium posters. a complete list of all confirmed presentations and titles by 27 February 2009. Look for more details in upcoming Calls for Papers on this exciting new way to Symposium abstracts (in the same format as contributed abstracts; see next transfer information and foster communication among symposia participants. page) are due by 6 March 2009.

520 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g AFS 2009 Annual Meeting 1st CALL FOR PAPERS • Nashville, TENNESSEE Format for Contributed Oral Symposium Proposals and Poster Papers

1. Symposium title: Brief but descriptive The Program Committee invites abstracts for 2. Organizer(s): Provide name, address, presentations (oral and poster) at contributed paper telephone number, fax number, and e-mail sessions. Authors must indicate their preferred address of each organizer. Indicate by an presentation format: (1) oral only, (2) poster only, (3) asterisk the name of the main contact person. oral preferred, but poster acceptable. Only one oral 3. Description: In 300 words or less, describe the presentation will be accepted for each senior author. topic addressed by the proposed symposium, the Poster submissions are encouraged because of objective of the symposium, and the value of the the limited time available for oral presentations. The symposium to AFS members and participants. program will include a dedicated poster session to 4. Format and time requirement: Indicate the encourage discussion between poster authors and The Marriott Renaissance Hotel and mix of formats you are considering (oral, speed attendees. adjoining Nashville Convention Center presentation, poster). State the time required Abstracts for contributed oral and offer spacious facilities to host the for regular oral presentations (i.e., 20 minutes poster papers must be received by 6 Nashville '09 AFS meeting. per speaker) and the time required for speed February 2009. All submissions must be made presentations (if any) and poster viewing (3 using the AFS online abstract submission form, minutes per speaker plus time for poster viewing). which is available on the AFS website (www. Format for 5. Chairs: Supply name(s) of individual(s) who will fisheries.org). When submitting your abstract: submitted abstracts chair the symposium. • Use a brief but descriptive title, avoiding 6. Presentation requirements: We encourage acronyms or scientific names in the title unless For abstracts submitted to a Symposium: speakers to use PowerPoint for presentations. the common name is not widely known; All Mac-based presentations must be converted Enter Symposium title: ______to PC format prior to the meeting. Presentations • List all authors, their affiliations, addresses, Specify format: 1. Oral in other software programs must be approved telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses; 2. Speed presentation prior to acceptance. • Provide a summary of your findings and restrict (accompanied by poster) 7. Audiovisual requirements: LCD projectors your abstract to 200 words. For abstracts submitted as a Contributed Paper: and laptops will be available in every room. All presenters will receive a prompt e-mail Other audiovisual equipment needed for the Enter 2 choices for topic: ______confirmation of their abstract submission and will be ______symposium will be considered, but computer notified of acceptance and the designated time and projection is strongly encouraged. Specify format: 1. Oral place of their presentation by 30 April 2009. 2. Poster 8. Special seating requests: Standard rooms For contributed papers, you will have the will be arranged theatre-style. Please indicate 3. Oral preferred, opportunity during the abstract submission but poster acceptable special seating requests (for example, “after the process to indicate which two general topics best break, a panel discussion with seating for 10 For all abstracts: fit the concept of your abstract. Topics include: Title: An example abstract for the AFS 2009 panel members will be needed”). Bioengineering, Communities and Ecosystems, 9. List of presentations: Annual Meeting Contaminants and Toxicology, Education, Fish Authors: Please supply information in the following format: Culture, Fish Health, Fish Conservation, Freshwater Presenter’s name 1. ______Bettoli, Phillip. Tennessee Cooperative Fishery Fish Ecology, Freshwater Fisheries Management, Research Unit, 205 Pennebaker Hall, Tennessee 2. ______Genetics, Habitat and Water Quality, Human Tentative title of presentation 1. ______Tech University, Cookeville, Tennessee 38505; Dimensions, Marine Fish Ecology, Marine Fisheries 931/372-3086; [email protected] 2. ______Management, Native Fishes, Physiology, Policy, Confirmed (yes/no) 1. ______Bevelhimer, Mark. Environmental Sciences Population Dynamics, Statistics and Modeling, Division—ORNL, BLDG 1505, P.O. Box 2008, 2. ______Species Specific (specify) and Other (specify). Presentation format Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831; 865/576-0266; Including this information in your submission will [email protected] (regular or speed) 1. ______help the Program Committee assign your talk, if 2. ______Fiss, Frank. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, accepted, to the most appropriate session. P.O. Box 40747, Nashville, Tennessee 37204; 10. Sponsors: If applicable, indicate sponsorship. Late submissions will not be accepted. AFS Please note that a sponsor is not required. 615/781-6519; [email protected] does not waive registration fees for presenters Presenter: Phillip Bettoli at symposia, workshops, or contributed paper Abstract: Abstracts are used by the Program sessions. All presenters and meeting attendees Committee to evaluate and select papers for must pay registration fees. Registration forms will be inclusion in the scientific and technical sessions available on the AFS website (www.fisheries.org) in of the 2009 AFS Annual Meeting. An informative May 2009; register early for cost savings. abstract contains a statement of the problem and its For information on how to construct a great significance, study objectives, principal findings and poster, please take a moment to consult Carline 2007. application, and it conforms to the prescribed format. (Guidelines to designing posters. Fisheries 32:306- 307). The maximum allowable poster size will be 91 cm Student presenter? (Work being reported was X 112 cm (36" x 44") in a landscape or portrait format. completed while a student): No

Posters Chair Nashville, the capital of Tennessee, Contributed Papers is a vibrant cosmopolitan city with Chair Frank Fiss Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency country charm and manners in the Phil Bettoli [email protected] heart of the deep south. Local Arrangements U.S. Geological Survey/ 615/781-6519 Chair Tennessee Cooperative Fishery Contacts Dave Rizzuto Research Unit Organizing a Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency [email protected] continuing education [email protected] 931/372-3086 course or workshop? General Meeting Chair 731/225-4422 Symposia Chair Please check future Calls for Papers for Bobby Wilson Tim Churchill Mark Bevelhimer information on who to contact. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Oak Ridge National Laboratory If you seek immediate assistance, please [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] contact Contributed Papers Chair 615/781-6578 931/781-6645 865/576-0266 Phil Bettoli.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 521 Publications: Book Reviews and New Titles

New Titles For Your Information (cloth); www.blackwellpublishing.com/book. asp?ref=9781405146296. AFS Guide to Fisheries Employment. Aquaculture Engineering. By O. Lekang. Second edition. Edited by D. A. Hewitt, W. Blackwell, Oxford. 2007. 340 pp. $200 Fisheries Buybacks. Edited by R. Curtis, and D. Squires. Blackwell, E. P. III, and A. V. Zale. AFS, Bethesda, MD. (cloth); www.blackwellpublishing.com/book. Oxford. 2007. 267 pp. $150 (cloth); 2006. 229 pp. $12.00 ($8.40 for AFS mem- asp?ref=9781405126106&site=1. bers) (paper); www.afsbooks.org/x55053xm. www.blackwellpublishing.com/book. html. Atlas de larvas de peixes da regiao cen- asp?ref=9780813825465&site=1. The second edition of this useful book tral da Zona Economica Exclusiva brasil- Land Use Effects on Streamflow and was published on the 10th anniversary of the eira. Edited by A. C. T. Bonecker, and M. S. Water Quality in the Northeastern publication of the first edition. The newer d. Castro. Museu Nacional, Rio de Janeiro. United States. By A. de la Cretaz, and P. K. edition has double the number of pages and 2006. 216 pp.; acd.ufrj.br/~museuhp/CP/S- Barten. CRC Press, Boca Raton. 2007. 319 mostly new authors, although the topics cov- Livros/S-Livros-2006/Slivros2006.html. pp. $139.95 (cloth); www.crcpress.com/ ered are similar. However, more stages and shopping_cart/products/product_detail.asp Environmental Constraints upon types of careers in fisheries are included as ?sku=9187&isbn=9780849391873&pare well as more information in each chapter on Locomotion and Predator-Prey nt_id=&pc=. fisheries employment in coastal and marine Interactions in Aquatic Organisms. environments. Edited by P. Domenici, G. Claireaux, and D. Sea Trout: Biology, Conservation and J. McKenzie. Philosophical Transactions of Management. Edited by G. Harris, and N. Reconciling Fisheries with Conservation: the Royal Society B 362:1927-2181, 2007. Milner. Blackwell, Oxford. 2006. 499 pp. Proceedings of the Fourth World pp. (cloth; paper). $200 (cloth); www.blackwellpublishing.com/ Fisheries Congress. Edited by J. Nielsen, book.asp?ref=9781405129916&site=1. J. J. Dodson, K. Friedland, T. R. Hamon, J. Fish Respiration and Environment. Musick, and E. Verspoor. AFS Symposium 49, Edited by M. N. Fernandes, F. T. Rantin, M. l. Status, Distribution, and Bethesda, MD. 2008. 1946 pp./2 volumes; Glass, and B. G. Kapoor. Science Publishers, Conservation of Native Freshwater $75 ($52.50 for AFS members) (paper); Enfield, NH. 2007. 392 pp. $109.50 (cloth); Fishes of Western North America: A www.afsbooks.org/54049p.html. www.scipub.net/fisheries/fish-respiration- Symposium Proceedings. Edited by M. This massive two-volume set contains 30 and-environment.html. J. Brouder, and J. A. Scheurer. American session summaries and 146 papers, and is the Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD. 2007. result of the 2004 World Fisheries Congress Fish Welfare. Edited by E. J. Branson. 207 pp.; $69 (paper); www.afsbooks. held in Vancouver, British Columbia. Blackwell, Oxford. 2008. 300 pp. $200 org/54053p.html. b

Lotek Wireless

522 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 4D Environmental O. S. Systems Data Analysis ...with Vision!

Emperor Aquatics, Inc.

> Manipulate and visualize time-varying spatial data > Streamline the integration of large and diverse data sets > Explore and analyze relationships among multiple variables > Easily communicate complex results in an engaging way Find out more web www.eonfusion.myriax.com email [email protected]

www.myriax.com Myriax

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 523 EMPLOYERS: To list a job opening on the AFS Online Job Center submit a position Announcements: description, job title, agency/company, city, state, responsibilities, qualifications, salary, closing date, and contact information (maximum 150 words) to jobs@fisheries. Job Center org. Online job announcements will be billed at $350 for 150 word increments. Please send billing information. Listings are free (150 words or less) for organizations with Associate, Official, and Sustaining memberships, and for Individual members, who are faculty members, hiring graduate assistants. If space is available, jobs may also be printed in Fisheries magazine, free of additional charge. To see more job listings go to www.fisheries.organd click Job Postings.

Project Environmental Scientist, Port Orchard or Tacoma Chair, Department of Natural Resource Ecology and (per candidate preference), Washington. Management, Iowa State University. Responsibilities: Assist with the execution and Responsibilities: Serve needs of students and management of wetland, fisheries and/or wildlife projects. stakeholders through effective leadership skills in Prepare wetland, delineation reports, function assessments, organization, budgeting, and communications. Stimulate mitigation plans, and other environmental compliance/ and facilitate excellence in all aspects of the department permitting documents. Conduct and supervise stream, s teaching, research, extension, outreach, and service wetland and wildlife habitat assessments. Supervise programs. Assist in obtaining resources through extramural construction and installation of wetland and stream funding. mitigation projects. Prepare biological evaluations and Qualifications:Earned doctorate in a discipline relevant to assessments for Section 7 consultation. Prepare and the subject areas of the department. Professor with tenure. manage environmental impact statements. Direct work of Demonstrated leadership skills in organization, budgeting, other staff members. Prepare bids and proposals. Manage communications, and obtaining resources through projects. Represent clients throughout the development extramural funding. permit process. Assist with tasks as assigned to assure Closing date: 1 December 2008. successful project completion. Contact: Apply through www.iastatejobs.com. Pal Lasley, Qualifications: M.S. (preferred) or B.S. in wetlands, Chair Search Committee, 515/294-2506; plasley@iastate. botany, fisheries, wildlife, or related field. 3-5 years edu. experience performing wetland delineations, impact and functional assessments, stream assessments, and Graduate Research Assistantships, University of Alaska, mitigation plans. Working knowledge of Northwest flora School of Fisheries and Ocean Sciences. and fauna and soils and experience with wide range of Responsibilities: M.Sc. or Ph.D. graduate students species and habitats. Successful permitting experience with with research interests in fish ecology and/or fisheries CWA Section 404 and Pacific Northwest regulations. Prefer population dynamics. Available projects include (1) stock experience with Endangered Species Act compliance. differentiation of chum and Chinook salmon, (2) winter Washington and Oregon project experience desired. habitat use and philopatry of Dolly Varden, and (3) recruitment dynamics of sockeye salmon. Closing date: 1 December 2008. Qualifications:B.S. or M.S., minimum GPA of 3.00, and Contact: www.cytiva.com/cejobs/DetailGeoen. minimum GRE percentile score of 55 in two of the three asp?geoen1022; categories. Must be willing to relocate to Alaska. Salary: Annual stipend—M.S. $27,800 and Ph.D. $33,600; Fisheries Biologist and Project Leader, Hydroacoustic plus tuition and health benefits. Technology, Inc., Washington. Start date: January or May 2009. Responsibilities: Conduct acoustic tag and hydroacoustic Closing date: 1 December 2008 or until filled. fisheries studies, including system deployment and testing, Contact: Trent Sutton, [email protected], 907 474- data collection and analysis, interpretation of results, 7285, www.sfos.uaf.edu/directory/faculty/sutton/. report writing, supervision of personnel, other field duties, interfacing with clients, and other duties as assigned. Resource Assistant and Laboratory Team Member, Supervise personnel responsible for computer data Missouri Department of Conservation. entry and data analysis. Acoustic tag and hydroacoustic Responsibilities: Sort and accurately enumerate aquatic techniques training provided. invertebrates from preserved samples. May assist with Qualifications: B.A. See www.HTIsonar.com. other laboratory duties and field work. Closing date: 1 December 2008. Qualifications:B.S. or work toward completion of degree Contact: Sarah Tranum, [email protected], subject in fisheries, wildlife management, biological sciences, or line: fisheries biologist opportunity. related major. Academic background in aquatic entomology is desirable. Prefer experience with sampling and sorting

524 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g aquatic invertebrates and adherence to laboratory protocol. U.S. located in ports from Maine to North Carolina. citizen or authorized to work in the United States. Drug screen Responsibilities: Work at sea aboard required following offer of employment. vessels collecting and recording fish catch, discard, and Start and end dates: 1 January 2009 through 15 June biological samples. Average of 12 sea days a month in 40 to 2009. Potential renewal of up to 2,000 hours dependent on 100 trips ranging from one to 14 days. Attend three-week paid performance, work required, and funding. No benefits. training course in Woods Hole, Massachuetts. Salary: $9.32 per hour. Qualifications: B.S. in marine biology or biology. Own Closing date: 22 December 2008. transportation. U.S. or Canadian citizenship. Contact: Send resume with record of education, experience, Salary: $200 per sea day and $12 per land hour to start. Health and contact information for three references to William insurance, dental insurance, vacation, sick leave, and holidays. Mabee Resource Science Center, 1110 South, College Avenue, Start date: 21 January 2009. Columbia, Missouri 65201; 573/882-9909 x3261; wr.mabee@ Closing date: 31 December 2008. mdc.mo.gov. Contact: E-mail resume, references, list of biology courses, and cover letter detailing sea and fish experience to Marine Fisheries Observers, AIS, Inc. (contract to National [email protected]. See www.nefsc.noaa. Marine Fisheries Service, Fisheries Sampling Branch), Positions gov/femad/fsb/.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 525 Project Water Resources Engineer, GeoEngineers, Idaho. Contact: www.geoengineers.com. Responsibilities: Restore stream and rivers by preforming hydrologic, hydraulic, or geomorphic analyses. Manage and M.S. or Ph.D. Assistantship in Fisheries or Aquatic participate in the collection of field data. Complete complex Ecology, Natural History Survey, University of Illinois. analyses and designs with supervision. Write technical reports Research topics are varied and flexible, and coordinate full report production activities. Assist in the Responsibilities: development of proposals and project budgets. but individuals with interests related to the following two Qualifications: B.S. in engineering with emphasis on hydrology, projects are preferred (1) recruitment, behavior, reproductive hydraulics, or fluvial geomorphology. Minimum four years of strategies, and management of largemouth bass; and (2) consulting or related professional experience with professional population ecology of muskellunge. engineer registration. Expertise with stream and river restoration, Starting dates: June through August 2009. and coastal and estuarine systems plus experience with ArcView, Qualifications: B.S. or M.S. in fisheries or aquatic ecology. ArcMap, AutoCAD, and standard hydrologic, hydraulic and Salary: $17,000 per year including tuition waiver. data analysis software. Knowledge of Idaho environmental planning and regulatory environment and a general knowledge Contact: Send a cover letter, resume, copies of transcripts, of fisheries biology in the Pacific Northwest desired. Professional GRE scores, and three letters of reference to David H. Wahl, level verbal and written communication skills. Experience University of Illinois, 1816 S. Oak Street, Champaign, Illinois preparing plans, specifications, and cost estimates. 61820; d-wahl @uiuc.edu ; 217/728-4400.

2009 Membership Application PAID: American Fisheries Society • 5410 Grosvenor Lane • Suite 110 • Bethesda, MD 20814-2199 301/897-8616 x203 or 218 • fax 301/897-8096 • www.fisheries.org Name Please provide (for AFS use only) Employer Address Phone Industry Fax Academia E-mail Federal gov't. City State/province Recruited by an AFS member? yes__ no__ State/provincial gov't. Zip/postal code Country Name other MEMBERSHIP TYPE (includes print Fisheries and online Membership Directory) North America/Dues Other Dues Developing countries I (includes online Fisheries only) N/A $ 5 Developing countries II N/A $25 Regular $76 $88 Student (includes online journals) $19 $22 Young professional (year graduated) $38 $44 Retired (regular members upon retirement at age 65 or older) $38 $44 Life (Fisheries and 1 journal) $1,737 $1,737 Life (Fisheries only, 2 installments, payable over 2 years) $1,200 $1,200 Life (Fisheries only, 2 installments, payable over 1 year) $1,000 $1,000 JOURNAL SUBSCRIPTIONS (optional) North America Other Journal name Print Online Print Online Transactions of the American Fisheries Society $43 $25 $48 $25 North American Journal of Fisheries Management $43 $25 $48 $25 North American Journal of Aquaculture $38 $25 $41 $25 Journal of Aquatic Animal Health $38 $25 $41 $25 Fisheries InfoBase $25 $25 Payment Please make checks payable to American Fisheries Society in U.S. currency drawn on a U.S. bank or pay by VISA or MasterCard. Check P.O. number Visa MasterCard Account # Exp. date Signature

All memberships are for a calendar year. New member applications received January 1 through August 31 are processed for full membership that calendar year (back issues are sent). Those received September 1 or later are processed for full membership beginning January 1 of the following year. Fisheries, Vol. 33 No. 10, October 2008

526 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g International Governance of Fisheries Ecosystems: Learning from the Past, Finding Solutions for the Future Michael G. Schechter, Nancy J. Leonard, and William W. Taylor, editors

458 pages List price: $69 TO ORDER: AFS member price: $48 Item number: 550.56P Online: www.afsbooks.org Published July 2008 Mail: American Fisheries Society c/o Books International P.O. Box 605 Herndon, VA 20172

Phone: 703/661-1570

Fax: 703/996-1010

Fisheries experts increasingly acknowledge the importance of globalization on local, national, and international fisheries. This book brings together fisheries and governance experts from across the globe who present case studies on a broad spectrum of the internationally shared fisheries that inhabit diverse freshwater and marine ecosystem types. Case studies provide the biological background of the fisheries resource, including status and threats to the resource and its ecosystem. The case studies review the evolution and current governance institutions of the fisheries resource, with particular focus on international or global institutions. Each study concludes with an evaluation of the effectiveness of the current fisheries governance institutions, and recommendations for changes. Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 527 Hydroacoustic Technology, Inc.

528 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 10 • o c t o b e r 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g