DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Research Highlights

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Annual Research Highlights Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Annual Research Highlights Volume X, Jan. 2019 Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Annual Research Highlights 2016 -2017 Volume X, Jan. 2019 Our Mission: To conserve and enhance fish and wildlife resources and provide opportunity for hunting, fishing, trapping, boating and other wildlife related activities. COVER: American bullfrog / John MacGregor Foreword Bear den research / Kevin Kelly esearch and monitoring are key vigilance in the conservation of the fish Nearly all of the projects included in Rsteps towards conserving and and wildlife resources that we hold in this document are partially or fully enhancing fish, wildlife, and habitat re- trust for the public. The 2016-2017 funded by federal programs including sources throughout the Commonwealth. KDFWR Research Highlights docu- the Wildlife Restoration Act (Pittman- To effectively manage a species it is ment represents targeted efforts by KD- Robertson), the Sport Fish Restoration vital to fully understand its ecology and FWR and partners to fulfill statewide Program (Dingell-Johnson), the State behavior along with its responses to conservation goals. Wildlife Grant Program (SWG), and management activities. As stewards of the Cooperative Endangered Species Kentucky’s fish and wildlife, it is our Funding Sources and Guide to Conservation Fund (Section 6). job to ensure seasons and bag limits are Federal Programs These federal programs serve a va- sustainable and to determine if man- KDFWR relies on hunting and riety of purposes; however, each has an agement actions are achieving desired fishing license fees, boat registration underlying goal of fish, wildlife, and/ goals. The following project summa- fees, and federal programs to fund or habitat conservation. Brief descrip- ries serve as a testament to KDFWR’s the seven divisions within KDFWR. tions of each of these programs are as 2 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources FOREWORD Federal Funding Source Program Goal Wildlife To restore, conserve, manage and Restoration Act enhance wild birds and mammals (Pittman-Robertson) and their habitats To fund fishery management Sport Fish Restoration projects, boating access, and aquatic (Dingell-Johnson) Program education Cooperative To fund conservation projects Endangered Species for candidate, proposed, or listed Conservation Fund species (Section 6) To develop and implement programs that benefit wildlife and State Wildlife Grant their habitats; specifically, species (SWG) Program and habitats of conservation concern Raising freshwater mussels at the Center for Mollusk Conservation / Obie Williams follows: KDFWR in 2017, while the sale of Citations for all published research These federal programs provided hunting and fishing licenses provided with Kentucky Department of approximately 19.9 million dollars to more than 28.5 million dollars- over Fish and Wildlife involvement are half of KDFWR’s budget included in the Table of Contents. For (see Figure 1). For refer- projects that have been completed $680,022 $2,155,079 and not yet published, a detailed $686,746 ence, we have included the state and federal funding summary will be included in the $3,431,378 sources for each project; first portion (“completed projects”) however, these projects of the document. For projects that may be additionally sup- began in 2016-2017, a brief 1-page plemented by outside fund- overview of the project is included in ing provided by non-profit the second portion (“new projects”) $28,553,263 organizations or universi- of the document. A comprehensive $19,897,559 ties. For each project sum- project reference guide lists all projects mary, we also identify the included in Research Highlights specific goals addressed by documents, beginning with publication either Kentucky’s Strategic year 2007. Plan or Kentucky’s State Wildlife Action Plan, the two guiding documents for Wildlife our agency. Hunting & Fishing Licenses Management Areas Please use the following Federal Reimbursement Camp Fees How to Use This citation when referencing this Boat Registration Document document: Other This document is Kentucky Department of Fish divided into four main and Wildlife Resources Annual Re- sections: published search Highlights, 2016-2017. Volume Figure 1. Kentucky Department of Fish and research, completed X. Publication of the Wildlife and Wildlife Resources Funding Sources 2017. projects, new projects, Fisheries Divisions. January, 2019, Total revenues for 2017 were $55,404,046. and project updates. 93 pp. Annual Research Highlights 2016-2017 3 Table of Contents Survey and Assessment of the Fish Fauna of the Published Research Clarks River National Wildlife Refuge in Marshall, Contact Program Coordinator Laura Burford McCracken, and Graves Counties, Kentucky ([email protected]) for reprints of these publications. Long, J.M., D. Stewart, J. Shiflet, D. Balsman, and D. Shoup. 2017. Bait type influences on catch and by catch in tandem hoop nets set in reservoirs. Fisheries New Projects Research 186(2017)102-108. These projects began in 2016-2017. Slankard, K. and G. Sprandel. 2017. Monitoring bird Fisheries response to forest stand improvement on Kentucky Wildlife Management Areas. The Kentucky Warbler Distribution and Status of Rare and Endemic Fishes in 93(3):59-69. the Barren River Drainage, Kentucky Taylor, L., K. Slankard, and P. Hahs. 2017. The Evaluation of Angling Effort Using Remote Cameras recovery and current distribution of nesting ospreys (Pandion haliaetus) in Kentucky. The Kentucky Survey of the Fishes of the Lower Ohio River Drainage Warbler 93(4):87-93. in the Coastal Plain Province of Western Kentucky Completed Projects and Monitoring Project Updates Summaries This section includes brief updates for selected projects that began prior to 2016-2017. Wildlife WILDLIFE Monitoring Songbird Response to Forest Stand Improvement on Kentucky Wildlife Management Statewide Osprey Survey Update Areas Summary of West Nile Virus Surveillance in Kentucky Ruffed Grouse FISHERIES Winter Distribution of Golden Eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) in Kentucky Alligator Gar Propagation and Restoration in Western Kentucky Control and Containment of Asian Carp in the Ohio Fisheries River Ichthyofaunal Survey and Assessment of Fish Species of Cumberland Darter (Etheostoma susanae) Restoration Greatest Conservation Need in the Red River, Lower Monitoring in Cogur Fork, Upper Cumberland River Cumberland River Drainage, Kentucky Drainage, Kentucky Status Survey of the Goldstripe Darter, Etheostoma Evaluation of a 36-inch Min. Length Limit on parvipinne, in Kentucky Muskellunge at Three Kentucky Reservoirs Status Survey of the Redside Dace, Clinostomus Evaluation of Stocking Original and Reciprocal elongatus, in Kentucky Cross Hybrid Striped Bass in Three Kentucky Impoundments 4 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources TABLE of CONTENTS The Fishing in Neighborhoods (FINs) Program: Providing Fishing Opportunities to Residents in Cities across the Commonwealth Impacts of Asian Carp Harvest Program on Sportfish in Kentucky Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Restoration Monitoring in Long Fork, Red Bird River Drainage, Kentucky Lake Sturgeon Restoration in the Upper Cumberland River Drainage in Kentucky Monitoring and Evaluation of Asian Carp on the Ohio River Silver Carp Demographics Targeted Sampling for Fish Species of Greatest Conservation Need in Kentucky Using telemetry to monitor the movements and distribution of Asian Carp in the Ohio River Assessment of Statewide Size and Creel Limits on Smallmouth Bass in Old Pool 6 of Green River Evaluation of Muskellunge Stockings in the Kentucky River Evaluation of New Commercial and Recreational Regulations on Catfish in the Ohio River Investigation of the Restoration of Native Walleye in the Upper Barren River Lake Sturgeon Restoration in the Cumberland River Ohio River Sander Investigations Warmwater Streams Sport Fish Surveys Appendix This section includes references for projects from 2007- 2017...................................................................................82 KDFWR Contacts More information regarding the project summaries within this publication can be obtained by contacting the listed KDFWR contacts ..............................................................93 Osprey with trout / John Williams Annual Research Highlights 2016-2017 5 Wildlife Biologists prepare electrofishing equipment for population sampling / Obie Williams Completed Projects 6 Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources Wildlife / COMPLETED PROJECTS AND MONITORING SUMMARIES Winter Distribution of Golden Eagles (Aquila chrysaetos) in Kentucky Loren Taylor and Kate Slankard Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources Abstract The winter distribution and abundance of Golden Eagles in the eastern United States is poorly understood. To address this knowledge gap, we participated in the “Appalachian Eagle Monitoring Program,” where we monitored wintering Golden Eagles across Kentucky, utilizing a network of camera traps from 2012-2017. We verified the occurrence of Golden Eagles by reviewing trail camera images and calculated the frequency of Golden Two Golden Eagles visit a camera trap at Bernheim Forest in 2013. Eagle presence and maximum count of individuals for each area. Through this study, we were able to better map the U.S., but no nesting activity has been rare transient and winter resident, winter distribution of Golden Eagles confirmed in the eastern U.S. since the occurring regularly
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Research Funding (Total $2,552,481) $15,000 2019
    CURRICULUM VITAE TENNESSEE AQUARIUM CONSERVATION INSTITUTE 175 BAYLOR SCHOOL RD CHATTANOOGA, TN 37405 RESEARCH FUNDING (TOTAL $2,552,481) $15,000 2019. Global Wildlife Conservation. Rediscovering the critically endangered Syr-Darya Shovelnose Sturgeon. $10,000 2019. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency. Propagation of the Common Logperch as a host for endangered mussel larvae. $8,420 2019. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency. Monitoring for the Laurel Dace. $4,417 2019. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency. Examining interactions between Laurel Dace (Chrosomus saylori) and sunfish $12,670 2019. Trout Unlimited. Southern Appalachian Brook Trout propagation for reintroduction to Shell Creek. $106,851 2019. Private Donation. Microplastic accumulation in fishes of the southeast. $1,471. 2019. AZFA-Clark Waldram Conservation Grant. Mayfly propagation for captive propagation programs. $20,000. 2019. Tennessee Valley Authority. Assessment of genetic diversity within Blotchside Logperch. $25,000. 2019. Riverview Foundation. Launching Hidden Rivers in the Southeast. $11,170. 2018. Trout Unlimited. Propagation of Southern Appalachian Brook Trout for Supplemental Reintroduction. $1,471. 2018. AZFA Clark Waldram Conservation Grant. Climate Change Impacts on Headwater Stream Vertebrates in Southeastern United States $1,000. 2018. Hamilton County Health Department. Step 1 Teaching Garden Grants for Sequoyah School Garden. $41,000. 2018. Riverview Foundation. River Teachers: Workshops for Educators. $1,000. 2018. Tennessee Valley Authority. Youth Freshwater Summit $20,000. 2017. Tennessee Valley Authority. Lake Sturgeon Propagation. $7,500 2017. Trout Unlimited. Brook Trout Propagation. $24,783. 2017. Tennessee Wildlife Resource Agency. Assessment of Percina macrocephala and Etheostoma cinereum populations within the Duck River Basin. $35,000. 2017. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Status surveys for conservation status of Ashy (Etheostoma cinereum) and Redlips (Etheostoma maydeni) Darters.
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Species April 2007
    Fishes of Indiana April 2007 The Wildlife Diversity Section (WDS) is responsible for the conservation and management of over 750 species of nongame and endangered wildlife. The list of Indiana's species was compiled by WDS biologists based on accepted taxonomic standards. The list will be periodically reviewed and updated. References used for scientific names are included at the bottom of this list. ORDER FAMILY GENUS SPECIES COMMON NAME STATUS* CLASS CEPHALASPIDOMORPHI Petromyzontiformes Petromyzontidae Ichthyomyzon bdellium Ohio lamprey lampreys Ichthyomyzon castaneus chestnut lamprey Ichthyomyzon fossor northern brook lamprey SE Ichthyomyzon unicuspis silver lamprey Lampetra aepyptera least brook lamprey Lampetra appendix American brook lamprey Petromyzon marinus sea lamprey X CLASS ACTINOPTERYGII Acipenseriformes Acipenseridae Acipenser fulvescens lake sturgeon SE sturgeons Scaphirhynchus platorynchus shovelnose sturgeon Polyodontidae Polyodon spathula paddlefish paddlefishes Lepisosteiformes Lepisosteidae Lepisosteus oculatus spotted gar gars Lepisosteus osseus longnose gar Lepisosteus platostomus shortnose gar Amiiformes Amiidae Amia calva bowfin bowfins Hiodonotiformes Hiodontidae Hiodon alosoides goldeye mooneyes Hiodon tergisus mooneye Anguilliformes Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American eel freshwater eels Clupeiformes Clupeidae Alosa chrysochloris skipjack herring herrings Alosa pseudoharengus alewife X Dorosoma cepedianum gizzard shad Dorosoma petenense threadfin shad Cypriniformes Cyprinidae Campostoma anomalum central stoneroller
    [Show full text]
  • A Thesis Entitled Molecular, Morphological, and Biogeographic Resolution of Cryptic Taxa in the Greenside Darter Etheostoma Blen
    A Thesis Entitled Molecular, morphological, and biogeographic resolution of cryptic taxa in the Greenside Darter Etheostoma blennioides complex By Amanda E. Haponski Submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for The Master of Science Degree in Biology (Ecology-track) ____________________________ Advisor: Dr. Carol A. Stepien ____________________________ Committee Member: Dr. Timothy G. Fisher ____________________________ Committee Member: Dr. Johan F. Gottgens ____________________________ College of Graduate Studies The University of Toledo December 2007 Copyright © 2007 This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no parts of this document may be reproduced without the expressed permission of the author. An Abstract of Molecular, morphological, and biogeographic resolution of cryptic taxa in the Greenside Darter Etheostoma blennioides complex Amanda E. Haponski Submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for The Master of Science Degree in Biology (Ecology-track) The University of Toledo December 2007 DNA sequencing has led to the resolution of many cryptic taxa, which are especially prevalent in the North American darter fishes (Family Percidae). The Greenside Darter Etheostoma blennioides commonly occurs in the lower Great Lakes region, where two putative subspecies, the eastern “Allegheny” type E. b. blennioides and the western “Prairie” type E. b. pholidotum , overlap. The objective of this study was to test the systematic identity and genetic divergence distinguishing the two subspecies in areas of sympatry and allopatry in comparison to other subspecies and close relatives. DNA sequences from the mtDNA cytochrome b gene and control region and the nuclear S7 intron 1 comprising a total of 1,497 bp were compared from 294 individuals across 18 locations, including the Lake Erie basin and the Allegheny, Meramec, Obey, Ohio, Rockcastle, Susquehanna, and Wabash River systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Relationships with Large Wood in Small Streams
    Amencan F~sheriesSociety Symposium 37:179-193, 2003 Fish Relationships with Large Wood in Small Streams USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Department ofFisheries and Wildlife Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24060, USA USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station 1000 Front Street, Oxford, Massachusetts 38655, USA Abstracf.-Many ecological processes are associated with large wood in streams, such as forming habitat critical for fish and a host of other organisms. Wood loading in streams varies with age and species of riparian vegetation, stream size, time since last disturbance, and history of land use. Changes in the landscape resulting from homesteading, agriculture, and logging have altered forest environments, which, in turn, changed the physical and biological characteristics of many streams worldwide. Wood is also important in creating refugia for fish and other aquatic species. Removing wood from streams typically results in loss of pool habitat and overall complexity as well as fewer and smaller individuals of both coldwater and warmwater fish species. The life histories of more than 85 species of fish have some association with large wood for cover, spawning (egg attachment, nest materials), and feeding. Many other aquatic organisms, such as crayfish, certain species of freshwater mus- sels, and turtles, also depend on large wood during at least part of their life cycles. Introduction Because decay rate and probability of displace- ment are a function of size, large pieces have a Large wood can profoundly influence the struc- greater influence on habitat and physical processes ture and function of aquatic habitats from head- than small pieces. In general, rootwads, branches, waters to estuaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Tennessee Fish Species
    The Angler’s Guide To TennesseeIncluding Aquatic Nuisance SpeciesFish Published by the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Cover photograph Paul Shaw Graphics Designer Raleigh Holtam Thanks to the TWRA Fisheries Staff for their review and contributions to this publication. Special thanks to those that provided pictures for use in this publication. Partial funding of this publication was provided by a grant from the United States Fish & Wildlife Service through the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Authorization No. 328898, 58,500 copies, January, 2012. This public document was promulgated at a cost of $.42 per copy. Equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs of the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency is available to all persons without regard to their race, color, national origin, sex, age, dis- ability, or military service. TWRA is also an equal opportunity/equal access employer. Questions should be directed to TWRA, Human Resources Office, P.O. Box 40747, Nashville, TN 37204, (615) 781-6594 (TDD 781-6691), or to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office for Human Resources, 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Arlington, VA 22203. Contents Introduction ...............................................................................1 About Fish ..................................................................................2 Black Bass ...................................................................................3 Crappie ........................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Darter Reproductive Seasons Author(S): Clark Hubbs Reviewed Work(S): Source: Copeia, Vol
    Darter Reproductive Seasons Author(s): Clark Hubbs Reviewed work(s): Source: Copeia, Vol. 1985, No. 1 (Feb. 11, 1985), pp. 56-68 Published by: American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists (ASIH) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1444790 . Accessed: 10/01/2012 14:26 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists (ASIH) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Copeia. http://www.jstor.org 56 COPEIA, 1985, NO. 1 changes in kinosternid turtles. J. Herpetol. 6:183- . 1938. Seasonal changes in the testes of the 189. musk turtle Sternotherusodoratus L. J. Morphol. 63: MCPHERSON, R. J., AND K. R. MARION. 1981. Sea- 301-317. sonal testicular cycle of the stinkpot turtle (Ster- SAINTGIRONS, H. 1982. Reproductive cycles of male notherus odoratus) in central Alabama. Herpetolog- snakes and their relationships with climate and fe- ica 37:33-40. male reproductive cycles. Herpetologica 38:5-16. MITCHELL, J. C. 1982. Population ecology and de- SPEAT, R. H. 1973. Seasonal variation in the tubular mography of the freshwater turtles Chrysemyspicta and interstitial areas of the testes in Sternothaerus and Sternotherusodoratus.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Stability, Persistence and Habitat Associations of the Pearl Darter Percina Aurora in the Pascagoula River System, Southeastern USA
    Vol. 36: 99–109, 2018 ENDANGERED SPECIES RESEARCH Published June 13 https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00897 Endang Species Res OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS Stability, persistence and habitat associations of the pearl darter Percina aurora in the Pascagoula River System, southeastern USA Scott R. Clark1,4,*, William T. Slack2, Brian R. Kreiser1, Jacob F. Schaefer1, Mark A. Dugo3 1Department of Biological Sciences, The University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, Mississippi 39406, USA 2US Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Environmental Laboratory EEA, Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180, USA 3Mississippi Valley State University, Department of Natural Sciences and Environmental Health, Itta Bena, Mississippi 38941, USA 4Present address: Department of Biology and Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, USA ABSTRACT: The southeastern United States represents one of the richest collections of aquatic biodiversity worldwide; however, many of these taxa are under an increasing threat of imperil- ment, local extirpation, or extinction. The pearl darter Percina aurora is a small-bodied freshwater fish endemic to the Pearl and Pascagoula river systems of Mississippi and Louisiana (USA). The last collected specimen from the Pearl River drainage was taken in 1973, and it now appears that populations in this system are likely extirpated. This reduced the historical range of this species by approximately 50%, ultimately resulting in federal protection under the US Endangered Species Act in 2017. To better understand the current distribution and general biology of extant popula- tions, we analyzed data collected from a series of surveys conducted in the Pascagoula River drainage from 2000 to 2016. Pearl darters were captured at relatively low abundance (2.4 ± 4.0 ind.
    [Show full text]
  • General Geological Information for the Tri-States of Kentucky, Virginia and Tennessee
    General Geological Information for the Tri-States Of Kentucky, Virginia and Tennessee Southeastern Geological Society (SEGS) Field Trip to Pound Gap Road Cut U.S. Highway 23 Letcher County, Kentucky September 28 and 29, 2001 Guidebook Number 41 Summaries Prepared by: Bruce A. Rodgers, PG. SEGS Vice President 2001 Southeastern Geological Society (SEGS) Guidebook Number 41 September 2001 Page 1 Table of Contents Section 1 P HYSIOGRAPHIC P ROVINCES OF THE R EGION Appalachian Plateau Province Ridge and Valley Province Blue Ridge Province Other Provinces of Kentucky Other Provinces of Virginia Section 2 R EGIONAL G EOLOGIC S TRUCTURE Kentucky’s Structural Setting Section 3 M INERAL R ESOURCES OF THE R EGION Virginia’s Geological Mineral and Mineral Fuel Resources Tennessee’s Geological Mineral and Mineral Fuel Resources Kentucky’s Geological Mineral and Mineral Fuel Resources Section 4 G ENERAL I NFORMATION ON C OAL R ESOURCES OF THE R EGION Coal Wisdom Section 5 A CTIVITIES I NCIDENTAL TO C OAL M INING After the Coal is Mined - Benefaction, Quality Control, Transportation and Reclamation Section 6 G ENERAL I NFORMATION ON O IL AND NATURAL G AS R ESOURCES IN THE R EGION Oil and Natural Gas Enlightenment Section 7 E XPOSED UPPER P ALEOZOIC R OCKS OF THE R EGION Carboniferous Systems Southeastern Geological Society (SEGS) Guidebook Number 41 September 2001 Page i Section 8 R EGIONAL G ROUND W ATER R ESOURCES Hydrology of the Eastern Kentucky Coal Field Region Section 9 P INE M OUNTAIN T HRUST S HEET Geology and Historical Significance of the
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis Improving Rock Ramp Fishways for Small-Bodied
    THESIS IMPROVING ROCK RAMP FISHWAYS FOR SMALL-BODIED GREAT PLAINS FISHES Submitted by Tyler R. Swarr Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Master of Science Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Summer 2018 Master’s Committee: Advisor: Christopher A. Myrick Kevin R. Bestgen Brian P. Bledsoe Copyright by Tyler R. Swarr 2018 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT IMPROVING ROCK RAMP FISHWAYS FOR SMALL-BODIED GREAT PLAINS FISHES The growing global need to improve the longitudinal connectivity of lotic systems is often met by using fish passage structures (fishways). When designing fishways in the past, biologists and engineers focused primarily on strong swimming species such as salmonids. However, the majority of riverine species in the interior United States are not salmonids and may be excluded by fishways built using salmonid criteria due to lower swimming abilities and/or behavioral differences. I designed and built a 9.1-m long adjustable hydraulic research flume at the Colorado State University Foothills Fisheries Laboratory (FFL) to test fish passage and evaluate the effects of grade (slopes of 2 – 10%, in 2% increments) on the passage success of three Great Plains fish species: Flathead Chub Platygobio gracilis, Stonecat Noturus flavus, and Arkansas Darter Etheostoma cragini. A 6.1-m long rock ramp fishway was installed in the flume and four PIT tag antennas were used to detect full or partial passage success. In order to test the key assumption that tagging does not affect fish performance, I evaluated the impacts of 8-mm PIT tags on Arkansas Darter and found no significant difference in the survival and swimming abilities of PIT tagged fish versus non-tagged fish.
    [Show full text]
  • A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States And
    t a AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY QL 614 .A43 V.2 .A 4-3 AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY Special Publication No. 2 A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes -^ ru from the United States m CD and Canada (SECOND EDITION) A/^Ssrf>* '-^\ —---^ Report of the Committee on Names of Fishes, Presented at the Ei^ty-ninth Annual Meeting, Clearwater, Florida, September 16-18, 1959 Reeve M. Bailey, Chairman Ernest A. Lachner, C. C. Lindsey, C. Richard Robins Phil M. Roedel, W. B. Scott, Loren P. Woods Ann Arbor, Michigan • 1960 Copies of this publication may be purchased for $1.00 each (paper cover) or $2.00 (cloth cover). Orders, accompanied by remittance payable to the American Fisheries Society, should be addressed to E. A. Seaman, Secretary-Treasurer, American Fisheries Society, Box 483, McLean, Virginia. Copyright 1960 American Fisheries Society Printed by Waverly Press, Inc. Baltimore, Maryland lutroduction This second list of the names of fishes of The shore fishes from Greenland, eastern the United States and Canada is not sim- Canada and the United States, and the ply a reprinting with corrections, but con- northern Gulf of Mexico to the mouth of stitutes a major revision and enlargement. the Rio Grande are included, but those The earlier list, published in 1948 as Special from Iceland, Bermuda, the Bahamas, Cuba Publication No. 1 of the American Fisheries and the other West Indian islands, and Society, has been widely used and has Mexico are excluded unless they occur also contributed substantially toward its goal of in the region covered. In the Pacific, the achieving uniformity and avoiding confusion area treated includes that part of the conti- in nomenclature.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Ecology and Habitat Preference of the Leopard Darter, Percina Pantherina
    REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY AND HABITAT PREFERENCE OF THE LEOPARD DARTER, PERCINA PANTHERINA By PAUL WILLIAM /~AMES Bachelor of Science University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas 1981 ·4::er of Science ...1.issouri State University 3pringfield, Missouri 1983 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the·Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY July, 1989 . - ~· ,• ) "' Oklahoma State Univ. Lihra1 REPRODUCTIVE ECOLOGY AND HABITAT PREFERENCE OF THE LEOPARD DARTER, PERCINA PANTHERINA Thesis Approved: ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank my advisor, Dr. o. Eugene Maughan, for giving me the opportunity to work on this project and for his encouragement throughout my graduate program. I would also like to thank the members of my graduate committee, Dr. William A. Drew, Dr. Anthony A. Echelle, Dr. Rudolph J. Miller, and Dr. Alexander v. Zale, for their professional and personal advice throughout the course of the study. I wish to extend my sincere gratitude to the u. s. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, and the Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit for providing financial and technical support for the study. I am especially grateful to Mr. Frank James of the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation's McCurtain County Wilderness Area for his friendship and hospitality during extended field trips. A sincere thanks goes to Rick Horton, Steve O'Donnell, and Todd Phillips for their help in the field and laboratory. A special thanks goes to Stuart Leon for helping with the development of many of the field and data analysis techniques used in this study.
    [Show full text]