Vol 33 no 5 MAY 2008

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

Demonstration Flow Assessment: Judgement and Visual Observation in Instream Flow Studies

Management Concerns about Known and Potential Impacts of Lead Use in Shooting and Activities

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 209 Bringing Back Winter Flounder

Hatchery reared winter flounder are tagged with fluorescent red Visible Implant Elastomer to distinguish them from wild fish after release. Dr. Fairchild releases the flounder into shallow coastal waters at a length of about 40 mm.

now evaluating how well the released fish contribute The winter flounder Pseudopleuronectes americanus to the natural populations and developing strategies is an important commercial and recreational fish to maximize post release survival3. along much of North America’s Atlantic coast.

Inshore habitat degradation and An essential aspect of the investigation is the ability contributed to stock declines throughout their range, to identify individuals derived from the release leaving catches at a fraction of historical levels. program. This is achieved using NMT’s Visible Reducing fishing mortality and protecting essential Implant Elastomer (VIE). Critical characteristics of habitat have helped stocks to begin recovery, but VIE include the ability to tag small fish, the capacity they still have a long way to go. to identify different batches of fish, the rapid rate of

tagging that can be achieved, and the low cost tag. To accelerate the recovery of winter flounder,

researchers in New Hampshire, led by Dr. Elizabeth Please contact us to discuss our systems for tagging Fairchild, are developing and evaluating a stock aquatic organisms. enhancement program. They have established the

culture techniques for winter flounder, determined 1. Fairchild EA, Howell WH. 2000. J. Sea Research 44(1-2):81-90. the optimal size for releasing juveniles for predator 2. Fairchild EA et al. 2005. Aquacul. Res. 36(14):1374-1383. avoidance1 and evaluated release sites2. They are 3. Fairchild EA, Howell WH. 2004. J. Fish Biol. 65:69-87. 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]

210 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g vol 33 no 5 MAY 2008

AmericFisheriesan Fisheries Society • www.fisheries.org editorial / subscription / circulation offices 5410 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110 • Bethesda, MD 20814-2199 301/897-8616 • fax 301/897-8096 • [email protected] The American Fisheries Society (AFS), founded in 1870, is the oldest and largest professional society representing fisheries scientists. The AFS promotes scientific research and enlightened management of aquatic resources for optimum use and enjoyment by the public. It also encourages comprehensive education of fisheries scientists and continuing on-the-job training.

AFS FISHERIES Editors OFFICERS STAFF Senior Editor Science Editors Column: Column: President Ghassan “Gus” N. Madeleine Mary C. Fabrizio rassam Hall-Arber 212 President's Hook 237 Director's Line President Elect Director of Ken Ashley Who are We? Initiating a Dialogue to Climate, Fisheries and Wildlife William G. Franzin Publications Doug Beard Define Our Core Values and Purpose Climate change issues continue to gain public First Aaron Lerner Ken Currens Highlights of preliminary impressions of Vice President Managing attention, and AFS has been a leader in William E. Kelso Donald C. Jackson Editor the responses to the AFS membership offering symposia examining climate change Deirdre M. Kimball Second Beth Beard survey, which was distributed electronically Robert T. Lackey and its effects on fisheries. Vice President Production to a random sample of AFS members. Gus Rassam Wayne A. Hubert Editor Dennis Lassuy Past President Cherie Worth Allen Rutherford Mary C. Fabrizio Jennifer L. Nielsen Book Review Executive Editors News: Director Francis Juanes News: 238 AFS Units Ghassan “Gus” N. Ben Letcher rassam Keith Nislow 213 Fisheries AFS constitution and rules: Dues and fees for 2008 are $76 in North America Update: 241 Proposed ($88 elsewhere) for regular members, $19 in North America ($22 elsewhere) for student members, and $38 214 Legislation and Amendments ($44) retired members. Fees include $19 for Fisheries Policy subscription. Nonmember and library subscription rates are $106 ($127). Price per copy: $3.50 member; $6 Elden Hawkes, Jr. Editorial: nonmember. Fisheries (ISSN 0363-2415) is published 242 FISHeries forum monthly by the American Fisheries Society; 5410 Truth, Faith, and Transparency Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110; Bethesda, MD 20814-2199 Fisheries Currents: in Peer Review—Perspectives on ©copyright 2008. Periodicals postage paid at Bethesda, 215 Science News From AFS Maryland, and at an additional mailing office. A copy of the AFS Peer Review Process Fisheries Guide for Authors is available from the editor or Steven J. Cooke the AFS website, www.fisheries.org. If requesting from the Journal Highlights: managing editor, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed envelope with your request. Republication or systematic 216 transactions of Calendar: or multiple reproduction of material in this publication the American Fisheries is permitted only under consent or license from the 243 Fisheries events American Fisheries Society. Postmaster: Send address Society changes to Fisheries, American Fisheries Society; 5410 Column: Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110; Bethesda, MD 20814-2199. Feature: 246 students' Angle Fisheries is printed on 10% post-consumer 217 FISHERIES Research Student Peer Reviewer: recycled paper with soy-based printing inks. Demonstration Flow Assessment: Benefits for the Profession Judgment and Visual Observation and the Student in Instream Flow Studies Steven H. Ranney Instream flows studies based on visual Advertising Index observation of alternative flows are Obituaries: increasingly popular. With the right 248 george Ridgway and techniques, they can be quantative and Advanced Telemetry Systems . . . . 259 credible. Carl Eldon Bond Steven F. Railsback and John Kadvany Emperor Aquatics, Inc...... 240 Update: Floy Tag 233 FEATURE: 249 Legislation and Forestry Suppliers, Inc...... 239 228 FISHERIES Policy Halltech Aquatic Research, Inc. . . . 231 MANAGEMENT Management Concerns about Known Publications: Hydroacoustic Technology, Inc. . . . 260 and Potential Impacts of Lead Use in 250 new Titles Llittle River Research and Design . . 227 Shooting and in Fishing Activities The authors summarize the AFS-TWS UPDATE: Northwest Marine Technology, Inc. . 210 technical review that discusses biological 252 ANNUAL Meeting hazards to fish, wildlife, and humans resulting Plenary Session Ocean Marine, Inc...... 235 from exposure to lead ammunition and . O.S. Systems ...... 237 Announcements: Chris I. Goddard, Nancy J. Leonard, Doug L. Sonotronics ...... 241 Stang, P. Jack Wingate, Barnett A. Rattner, 255 Job Center Vemco ...... 221 J. Christian Franson, and Steven R. Sheffield Vemco ...... 223 Cover: Small lead sinkers may be more likely to be consumed by waterfowl than larger Tell advertisers you found them through sinkers. Fisheries! Credit: Beth Beard, AFS

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 211 Highlights of preliminary impressions of the responses to the AFS membership survey, which was distributed electronically to a random sample of AFS members.

Mary C. Fabrizio Column: AFS President Fabrizio President's Hook can be contacted at [email protected].

Who are We? Initiating a Dialogue to Define Our Core Values and Purpose

Professional associations reflect the believe we have information that can dialogue on the future of world fisher- collective desires and ideas of their help us initiate this critical dialogue. ies. It is clear that AFS members place members; successful associations are One source of this information is the high value on our chosen profession those that adapt to membership changes recent AFS membership survey. A thor- and we desire increased awareness of and the new ideas or desires associated ough and detailed report on the results the potential contribution of fisheries with such changes. For example, the of this survey will be delivered to the professionals to deliberations on envi- American Fisheries Society grew from an AFS Governing Board at the 2008 AFS ronmental matters—matters that have association primarily comprised of fish Annual Meeting in Ottawa. Here, I simply increasingly become the focus of media culturists (in the 1870s) to an association wish to highlight my preliminary impres- attention. We view ourselves as contribu- with members who practiced fisheries sions of the responses we received. The tors of reasoned scientific information, science in all its diversity; this growth was membership survey was distributed but we are concerned that our collective accompanied by changes in the desires electronically to a random sample of AFS knowledge is rarely tapped, unless the of the Society. Instead of promoting members, and to our pleasant surprise, environmental issue specifically involves a single discipline (i.e., of over 55% of the recipients responded. fisheries (e.g., endangered salmonids, fish species), AFS promoted aquacul- As I considered the tabulated or overfishing of large pelagic species). ture, , fish health, responses, I came away with a strong I suggest that improving the visibility freshwater , marine fisheries, and impression of who we are. Allow me to and appreciation of so forth. This integrated view of fisher- explain. The membership survey included among the public is a major focus ies science enhances our understanding questions concerning AFS products and area of the next AFS strategic plan. Another way to obtain information of fisheries and encourages broader services (such as publications, mentor- ing, outreach, and advocacy), as well as concerning our contemporary identity scientific perspectives and increased questions concerning AFS governance, and core values is from focus groups. awareness of important findings from recruitment and retention, and future Focus groups are commonly used in related disciplines. In a general sense, priorities for the Society. Although almost marketing research to gauge reaction of the identity of the AFS changed with the all respondents supported the develop- consumers to new products; however, change in its membership. But perhaps ment of new products and services (e.g., non-profit organizations like AFS have a more important observation is that special publications and mentoring pro- successfully used focus groups to uncover this change was a manifestation of grams for young professionals), products the opinions, beliefs, and attitudes of the transformation of fisheries science. and services with wide support were not members. On a basic level, feedback from Today, AFS represents a broadly diverse necessarily high priorities for members. focus groups helps to reveal critical areas membership with interests in multiple This indicates that although many good of service or important products that may disciplines; our view of fisheries science suggestions for new activities exist, these have been overlooked. Depending on has become more interdisciplinary and are not necessarily activities that require how questions are crafted and posed, more complex. So, who are we now? attention in the next five years or so. focus group interactions can also uncover In my March column, I described the Directed questions concerning priorities needs and desires of the membership. intelligent association as an organiza- revealed the need to provide opportuni- Recognizing this, AFS is currently pursu- tion that sustains and uses knowledge ties for scientific interactions—between ing the use of focus groups to help us to guide decisions and to adapt to students and professionals and among understand the needs of our members changes; actions of intelligent associa- professionals—and to accommodate and disclose new activities that require tions are strategically guided and are the desire to be regarded as a national consideration and perhaps, future devel- focused on achieving a set of desired and global leader in the conservation of opment. Discoveries from such focus outcomes. Those desired outcomes marine and aquatic resources. Priority group interactions are rich grounds for can be articulated once the core val- was also highly placed on the need to new ideas and initiatives. I invite you to ues and purpose of the association increase appreciation of our profession share your thoughts on who we are and have been clearly defined. Knowing among members of the public. We want what we value with me, the AFS officers, who we are and what we value is an to be viewed as relevant to ongoing members of the AFS Governing Board, essential step in this journey. How do discussions of environmental issues, and and the AFS Executive Director. We look we begin to address this question? I we want to contribute to the global forward to continuing this dialogue.

212 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g News: Fisheries Jo a o Pa ulo Kr aj e wsk

Anglers’ Legacy reaches mats. The stalks can persist for two or 50,000 pledges more months after the diatoms die, keeping themselves small in order to The Anglers’ Legacy program has causing habitat damage for an extended avoid provoking larger gobies. Whether surpassed the 50,000 pledge milestone, period of time. Originally found in they did so because of stress caused by the Recreational Boating and Fishing Scotland and extreme northern Europe the bullying of larger fish or voluntarily by Foundation (RBFF) announced as the ini- and Asia, didymo has been transported restraining how much they ate was not tiative approaches its two-year anniver- worldwide. Recently, the species has clear. The team decided to try to fatten sary mark. The program, which asks avid been found in the northeast and mid- up some of the subordinate gobies to anglers to pledge to introduce newcom- Atlantic regions of the United States. In see what happened. To their surprise, the ers to boating and fishing, continues to many cases, anglers have unknowingly gobies simply refused the extra tidbits develop new partnerships with fishing transported the diatom on their fishing they were offered, apparently prefer- clubs and membership organizations, gear. Felt bottom boots and waders com- ring to remain small and avoid fights. sports media, outdoor retailers and monly used by anglers are considered manufacturers, state fish and wildlife among the worst culprits in the spread of NFHAP names “Waters to Watch” agencies, industry leaders, and outdoor this aquatic invader. Anglers are strongly The National Fish Habitat Action Plan enthusiasts nationwide. RBFF President encouraged to replace these boots with issued its 2008 “10 Waters to Watch” and CEO Frank Peterson said the goal non-porous materials. New boots made list at the National Casting Call event on for this year is to sign up an additional of a sticky rubber material are easier to the Potomac River in April. Assembled 85,000 new anglers to the program. clean and disinfect. by leading authorities on aquatic con- According to a 2007 survey of servation, the list is a collection of rivers, pledged ambassadors, most take more Fish diet to avoid fights streams, and shores that soon will be than 4 people a year fishing and also Some fish voluntarily go on diets, cleaner and healthier habitats for many generate an initial $120 in fishing according to researchers from the ARC fish and wildlife species.D ue to the tackle and equipment sales, buy $166 Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef combined actions of concerned com- in boating supplies and accessories, Studies and James Cook University in munity groups, non-profit organizations, and purchase 3.2 fishing licenses. Australia, and described in the jour- local watershed groups, Native American “At 50,000 pledges, this means the nal Current Biology. The scientists tribes, and state and federal agencies, program may have already generated discovered subordinate coral gobies these waters are being improved by $12 million for the boating and fish- deliberately go on a diet to avoid pos- planting streamside vegetation, remov- ing industries and 88,000 new fishing ing a challenge to their larger rivals. ing structures blocking fish from habitat, licenses for states,” said Peterson. “In studying gobies we noticed that and protecting bodies of water from the only the largest two individuals, a male effects of industrial processes, agriculture, Didymo found in Maryland and female, had mating rights within and livestock. The 10 waters include The Maryland Department of Natural the group,” explained Marian Wong. Big Spring Branch, Wisconsin; Lake Resources announced that didymo, an “All other group members are non- Oconee Island, between Atlanta and invasive, non-native algae, was found in breeding females, each being consistently Augusta, Georgia; Little Susitna River, Maryland for the first time by anglers at 5–10% smaller than its next largest near Wasilla and Anchorage, Alaska; Gunpowder Falls in Baltimore County. rival. We wanted to find out how they O’Dell Spring Creek, near Bozeman Didymo mats, also called “rock snot,” maintain this precise size separation.” and Ennis, Montana; South Fork Chalk look slimy, but feel like wet cotton or Once a subordinate fish grows to Creek, near Coalville, Utah; Stinky Creek, wool, and can be white, yellow, or within 5–10% of the size of its larger rival, near Alpine, Arizona;Tampa Bay shore- brown. Once didymo is established, it its size provokes a fight which usually line at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida; can cover and suffocate a stream bot- ends in the smaller goby being expelled Trout Run, Filmore County, Minnesota; tom, and movement of a single cell can from the group—and the safety of the Williams Run, northeastern Pennsylvania; contaminate a new waterway. Didymo coral it occupies. More often than not, the and Aaron Run, Frostburg, Maryland. is an algal diatom that forms long stalks evicted fish is then eaten by a predator. For more information on these which combine to form heavy, thick It appeared that the smaller gobies were projects, see http://fishhabitat.org.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 213 update: LegISLAtIOn AnD POLICy

elden Hawkes, Jr. AFS Policy Coordinator Hawkes can be contacted at ehawkes@fi sheries.org.

mAnAgement AnD given to developing countries. rear an initial agreement for a regional eNForCeMeNt oF Admiral Brooks, District 17 com- fi sheries management organization INterNAtIoNAL FISHerIeS mander of the u.S. Coast Guard, for the northwest pacifi c. Currently explained that many coastal nations in the draft treaty, Japan falls short On 3 April 2008 the Senate are not capable of handling fi sheries of what u.S. fi shermen adhere to Commerce, Science, and management, which in turn leads to under the Magnuson-Stevenson Act. Transportation Committee conducted resource exploitation and economic If this does not change, then she a hearing on the management and collapse. He concluded by endorsing recommends for the united States enforcement of international fi sher- the implementation of an integrated to withdraw from the negotiations. ies. The hearing started with John deep water system for the u.S. Negroponte, deputy Secretary of Coast Guard, which would further cLeAn wAter State, stating that there are many aid in the combat of Iuu fi shing. reStorAtIoN ACt nations that question the intention david benton, executive director of u.S. international fi shing policies of the Marine Conservation Alliance, On 16 April 2008, the Committee as it has not yet joined the law of stated that the united States must on Transportation and Infrastructure the Sea convention. He explained urge its Arctic neighbors to support received testimony on the Clean to the committee that U.S. fi sher- similar fi shery policies within their Water Restoration Act of 2007. The men already adhere to the rules own countries. He also implored hearing consisted of fi ve panels of and regulations of the convention. that controls need to be put in witnesses. Committee chairman John balsiger, acting assistant place before the continued retreat Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN) began administrator, NoAA National of Arctic ice allows for full-blown the hearing by stating that for 30 Marine Fisheries Service, stated commercial fi shing in the Arctic. years the Clean Water Act (CWA) that management strategies require James Cook, vice president of has doubled the number of waters multilateral regional approaches, and the pacifi c ocean producers, llC, that are safe for drinking, swimming, that regional fi sheries management focused mainly on fi sheries manage- and fi shing across the united States, organizations are vital in managing ment in the southwestern pacifi c. and has been universally praised illegal, unregulated, and unreported He explained that fi sheries scientists by industry, environmentalists, (Iuu) fi shing. He further elaborated have recommended a 25% reduc- Democrats, and Republicans alike. that steps have been taken to reduce tion in fi shing to better conserve He indicated that parties from across the bycatch of sea birds and sea tur- those fi sh stocks. However, countries the spectrum have expressed con- tles and then concluded by declaring give fi shermen permission to fi sh in cern over the mess and delay that a need to provide funding for other their EEZs, thus making conservation recent court decisions have caused. countries to collect data on fi shing. nearly impossible. He observed that He went on to state that the Clean david balton, Assistant Secretary the Western pacifi c Management Water Act should be restored with oceans and Fisheries, bureau of Council (which manages fi sheries the protections that were taken away oceans, environment, and Science policy in the region) has enacted by the Supreme Court decisions. for the u.S. department of State, an effective and aggressive policy, Rep. Mica (R-FL) expressed his dis- explained that three-fourths of and that the u.S. Coast Guard satisfaction over the language of the the world’s commercially exploited needs more funding and assets to legislation as it has been written. He fi sh stocks are at least overfi shed effectively monitor u.S. economic stated that the legislation is far from and over-capacity. He urged that zones in the southwest pacifi c. a restoration of the previous CWA, the united States join the law of lisa Speer from the Water and but is a representative of an agenda The Sea convention. balton also oceans program of the Natural item being pushed through. He expressed need for the creation of a resources defense Council explained further stated that this agenda item global record of fi shing vessels and that the united States, Korea, Continued on page 249 called for greater assistance to be Japan, and russia have entered into

214 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Fisheries Currents: SCIenCe neWS FrOm AFS

VoLUMe 3 ISSUe 3 MAY 2008

Pike not picky eaters Can toadfi sh whistle? trends for bass While northern pike are a familiar The lowly toadfi sh may have a face More and more anglers are heeding the and desirable fi sh in many parts of North only a mother could love but its loqua- call to voluntarily release the largemouth America, they are neither welcome nor cious tendencies may help open up a bass they catch. This catch-and-release native in the pacifi c Northwest. Some whole new world of eavesdropping on conservation ethic has been promoted states even offer a bounty for their cap- fi sh through “passive acoustics.” passive by the media, fi shing organizations, and ture, since pike are suspected of eating even some fi sheries agencies. Since most acoustics involves lowering hydrophones native salmon and trout, including some bass do survive being hooked, caught, from boats or towing hydrophone arrays endangered and threatened species. and released, this practice can affect through the water in order to detect fi sh So how many trout and salmon can a bass fi shing quality. In a recent paper on northern pike eat? In a recent paper in species through the noises they make the North American Journal of Fisheries the North American Journal of Fisheries naturally. In a recent paper in Transactions Management, scientists from the Texas Management, a group of researchers from of the American Fisheries Society, Michael Parks and Wildlife Department, the the u.S. Geological Survey, the university Fine of Virginia Commonwealth university , and the Florida Fish of Idaho, and Montana Fish, Wildlife and and robert Thorson outline how the and Wildlife Commission evaluated the Parks used bioenergetics modeling to relatively sedentary but noisy toadfi sh can changes in the voluntary release rate at determine how many other fi sh the pike be used to solve passive acoustic puzzles four Texas reservoirs and two Florida lakes are consuming. First, the scientists needed like recognition of individual fi sh, sound from 1975–2006. The voluntary release to determine how many northern pike pressure level, directionality, and interac- rate only refers to legally harvestable fi sh were living in a stretch of the Flathead river tions of fi sh through sound. Studies of released completely voluntarily and not in in Montana. Then they collected hundreds toadfi sh recordings made from the 1970s order to comply with bag limits or other of pike stomachs from anglers and ana- until 2002 reveal how the species uses regulations. using data from annual creel lyzed the contents. Finally, a bioenergetics surveys, the researchers determined that sound throughout the day and in differ- computer model was used to estimate the voluntary release rate had dramati- ent seasons. Like many sound-producing the quantity of fi sh that the Flathead river cally increased over time, reaching a peak pike would need to consume in order to fi sh, toadfi sh produce sound through rapid of 90% at the two Texas reservoirs in the survive. The estimated 1,200 northern contraction of “sonic muscles” around early 2000s. The voluntary release rate pike in the study area annually consumed the swim bladder. Male toadfi sh guard varied seasonally, by year, and among 8 metric tons (8.8 imperial tons) of fi sh their nests for several weeks, while using the different lakes and reservoirs studied. fl esh. While 82% of their diet was made a boatwhistle “boop” call in competition Although the reduced fi shing mortality up of other species such as sunfi sh and with other males or to attract females. rates benefi t the overall numbers of large- whitefi sh, the pike still ate an estimated both males and females also grunt. mouth bass, it can prove problematic for 13,000 westslope cutthroat trout and Boatwhistles often provoke grunts or fi sheries managers attempting to develop nearly 3,500 threatened bull trout. The “tags” from other males in accordance trophy fi sheries through slot-limits intended authors suggest that northern pike are to a dominance hierarchy. The authors to reduce competition and allow some contributing to the decreasing num- demonstrate the acoustic recordings fi sh to grow larger. Therefore, the authors bers of native salmon and trout. Using can provide a rich source of information suggest that managers attempting to use bioenergetics Modeling to estimate harvest regulations to change the size even about unseen fi sh, and research on Consumption of Native Juvenile structure of a bass population will need toadfi sh can pave the way for application Salmonids by Nonnative Northern to consider local angler attitudes towards of acoustic techniques to other species. Pike in the Upper Flathead river harvest. temporal trends in Voluntary System, Montana, by Clint C. Muhlfi eld, Use of Passive Acoustics for Assessing release of Largemouth bass, by Randall David H. Bennett, R. Kirk Steinhorst, behavioral Interactions in Individual Myers, John Taylor, Michael Allen, and Brian Marotz, and Matthew Boyer. toadfi sh, by Michael L. Fine and Robert F. Timothy F. Bonvechio. North American North American Journal of Fisheries Thorson. Transactions of the American Journal of Fisheries Management Management 28:636-648. Muhlfi eld can Fisheries Society 137:627-637. Fine 28:428-433. Myers can be contacted be contacted at cmuhlfi [email protected]. can be contacted at mfi [email protected]. at [email protected].

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 215 Volume 137 Journal Highlights: Issue 2 Transactions of the March 2008 American Fisheries Society

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

Stream Gradient-Related in Streams. Raymond A. Webster, Special Section: Movement and Growth of Atlantic Kenneth H. Pollock, Sujit K. Ghosh, Passive Acoustics Salmon Parr during Winter. Morten and David G. Hankin, pages 438-453. Stickler, Eva C. Enders, Curtis J. Passive Acoustics as a Tool Joseph J. Pennell, David Cote, Knut Alfredsen, Spotted Sunfish Habitat in Fisheries Science. Luczkovich, David A. Mann, and and David A. Scruton, pages 371-385. Selection at Three Florida Rivers Rodney A. Rountree, pages 533-541. and Implications for Minimum [Note] Tissue-Specific Sampling Flows. Andrew C. Dutterer and White Seabass Spawning for the Estimation of Striped Micheal S. Allen, pages 454-466. Behavior and Sound Production. Bass Whole-Body Proximate Scott A. Aalbers and Mark A. Composition. John M. Jacobs, Seasonal Patterns of Terrestrial Drawbridge, pages 542-550. Matt R. Rhodes, Brandon Martin, and Aquatic Prey Abundance Dennis McIntosh, William F. and Use by Oncorhynchus Distribution of Red Drum Van Heukelem, and Reginal mykiss in a California Coastal Spawning Sites Identified by M. Harrell, pages 386-392. Basin with a Mediterranean a Towed Hydrophone Array. Climate. David E. Rundio and Scott A. Holt, pages 551-561. Annual Run Size and Genetic Steven T. Lindley, pages 467-480. Use of Passive Acoustics to Characteristics of Atlantic Determine Red Drum Spawning in Sturgeon in the Altamaha River, How Systematic Age Georgia Waters. Susan K. Lowerre- Georgia. Douglas L. Peterson, Underestimation Can Impede Barbieri, Luiz R. Barbieri, J. R. Flanders, Paul Schueller, Rob DeVries, Joel Understanding of Fish Population A. G. Woodward, C. F. Cotton, and M. Fleming, Cheryl Grunwald, and Dynamics: Lessons Learned from Katheryn Knowlton, pages 562-575. Isaac Wirgin, pages 393-401. a Lake Superior Cisco Stock. Daniel L. Yule, Jason D. Stockwell, Jeff A. Identifying Sciaenid Critical Response of Larval Lost River and Black, Ken I. Cullis, Gary A. Cholwek, Spawning Habitats by the Use Shortnose Suckers to Wetland and Jared T. Myers, pages 481-495. of Passive Acoustics. Joseph J. Restoration at the Williamson River Luczkovich, R. Christopher Pullinger, Delta, Oregon. John D. Crandall, Relationships between Catch Stephen E. Johnson, and Mark Leslie B. Bach, Nathan Rudd, Mark per Unit Effort, Catchability, and W. Sprague, pages 576-605. Stern, and Matt Barry, pages 402-416. Abundance Based on Actual Diel Periodicity of Fish Sound Measurements of Salmonids in a Production in Charlotte Harbor, Age-0 Lost River Sucker and Mountain Stream. Jun-ichi Tsuboi Florida. James V. Locascio and Shortnose Sucker Nearshore and Shinsuke Endou, pages 496-502. David A. Mann, pages 606-615. Habitat Use in Upper Klamath Lake, Oregon: A Patch Occupancy Changes in the Soniferous Fishes in the Approach. Summer M. Burdick, of Hatchery and Wild Coho Salmon Hudson River. Katie A. Anderson, Heather A. Hendrixson, and Scott in the Strait of Georgia. R. J. Rodney A. Rountree, and Francis P. VanderKooi, pages 417-430. Beamish, R. M. Sweeting, K. L. Lange, Juanes, pages 616-626. and C. M. Neville, pages 503-520. Use of Passive Acoustics for [Note] New Species Richness Assessing Behavioral Interactions in Predictors First Tested on Fish Temporal and Spatial Variability Individual Toadfish. Michael L. Fine in a Small Tropical Stream. in Juvenile Red Snapper Otolith and Robert F. Thorson, pages 627-637. Łukasz Głowacki and Tadeusz Elemental Signatures in the Penczak, pages 431-437. Northern Gulf of Mexico. Passive Acoustic Techniques William F. Patterson, III, James H. in Fisheries Science: A Review Bayesian Spatial Modeling of Data Cowan, Jr., Charles A. Wilson, and and Prospectus. Damon P. from Unit-Count Surveys of Fish Zhongxing Chen, pages 521-532. Gannon, pages 638-656.

216 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Feature: Oak Grove Fork study site 3 at baseflow FISHERIES Research

Demonstration Flow Assessment: Steven F. Railsback and Instream flows studies based on visual John Kadvany observation of alternative flows are Judgment and Visual Observation Railsback is an environmental scientist increasingly popular. With the right in Instream Flow Studies with Lang, Railsback ABSTRACT: The Demonstration Flow Assessment (DFA) method evaluates instream flow and Associates, Arcata, techniques, they can be quantative and benefits using expert judgment and direct observation of habitat during several flows. Early DFA California. He can credible. applications were low-effort, qualitative, and vulnerable to well-known biases. We describe a be reached at Steve@ higher-effort, more quantitative DFA (or expert habitat mapping) approach that uses techniques Langrailsback.com. John from the judgment-based decision analysis literature to increase objectivity and reproducibility. Kadvany is a principal at Specific metrics—habitat types to be quantified visually during flow observations—are designed Policy and Decision Science, from appropriate conceptual models of how flow affects target resources. During field observations, patches of each habitat type are delineated by consensus and marked on maps for digital analysis. Menlo Park, California. A case study illustrates these procedures applied to instream flows for salmon spawning and rearing. Evaluación de Regímenes de Caudales: Introduction Two recent reviews of juicio y observación visual en instream flow methods (EPRI 2000; Annear et al. 2004) Estudios de Caudal Ecológico. noted the increasing use of RESUMEN: El método de Evaluación de Regímenes de Caudales (ERC) examina los beneficios assessments conducted by del caudal ecológico a través del juicio experto y observación directa del hábitat durante diferentes observing the stream during regímenes de caudal. Aplicaciones previas del ERC se caracterizaban por ser poco precisas, cualitativas several alternative flows, then y vulnerables a sesgos diversos. Con el fin de incrementar la objetividad y reproductibilidad de dichas recommending flows using evaluaciones, aquí se describe una ERC que implica un mayor esfuerzo que la anterior y enfoques de professional judgment as the carácter más cuantitativo (Mapeo Experto de Hábitat) obtenidos de literatura sobre técnicas de análisis primary basis. The Instream de decisión basados en juicio. Se diseñaron medidas específicas—tipos de hábitat a ser cuantificados visualmente durante la observación de los caudales—a partir de modelos conceptuales que describen Flow Council (Annear et al. cómo los caudales afectan las especies objetivo. Durante las observaciones en campo y por medio de 2004) referred to this approach un consenso, se delinean los parches de cada tipo de hábitat y se trasladan a un mapa para su análisis as the “Demonstration Flow digital. Un caso de estudio ilustra la aplicación de estos procedimientos al caudal ecológico para el Assessment” (DFA) method. desove y cultivo del salmón. Unofficially, the method has

Oak Grove Fork study site 3 at 35 cfs

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 217 Oak Grove Fork study site 3 at 80 cfs

Oak Grove Fork study site 3 at 150 cfs

Oak Grove Fork study site 3 at 200 cfs

Oak Grove Fork study site 3 at 300 cfs

218 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g also been called BOGSAR—“bunch of balancing effort against usefulness is cov- specific metrics developed by consensus guys standing along the river”—a name ered extensively in the judgment and from specific conceptual models rather reflecting the method’s reputation for sub- decision-making literature (e.g., Payne et than estimating a single holistic variable jectivity. The limitations of DFA noted al. 1993). However, little from this litera- such as “overall suitability.” Anchoring by EPRI (2000; five DFA studies between ture has previously been applied explicitly bias in estimating habitat area is reduced 1995 and 2000 reviewed) and Annear et to DFA. by delineating habitat patches on detailed al. (2004) arise from its potential subjec- Our approach is motivated by two maps instead of mentally estimating patch tivity: because DFA relies more on judg- basic principles of human judgment area. Susceptibility to group-think moti- ment and less on quantitative tools such and decision-making. First is “bounded vated by a shared set of desired outcomes as models and data analysis, it can appear rationality” (Watson and Buede 1987; (Budnitz et al. 1998) is reduced by includ- unscientific, irreproducible, and suscep- Payne et al. 1993), meaning that practi- ing diverse stakeholders in the assessment. tible to bias. cal decision-making processes are subject Other potential biases we consider include In practice, all decision models and to resource limitations; hence, estimation a tendency to underestimate uncertainty analyses depend on professional judgment. methods useful when resources are high in subjective measurements (Morgan and Model-based approaches, for example, are not necessarily useful when resources Henrion 1990) and failure to eliminate require judgment in selecting the pro- are low, and vice versa. Second is that incorrect observation “habits” developed cesses or variables to include in the model, judgments of complex quantities—the early in field assessment. where to place study sites, what parameter population of a large city, gross national Here we focus on DFA studies in which values to use, and how to interpret results. product (GNP), etc.—can be improved by observers use judgment to visually esti- Instead of describing alternative instream disaggregating the quantity into “smaller” mate the area of specific habitat types at flow methods as subjective versus quanti- or simpler quantities—population by several alternative flows. This kind of DFA tative, it is more useful to see them as hav- neighborhoods, economic production by (sometimes referred to as expert habitat ing different balances between the effort region and season—and then aggregating mapping) requires more effort than the they require and the amount of useful results. One application of this principle is earliest DFA studies, but produces results information they provide. Good methods the use of influence diagrams (Merkhofer that are more quantitative, reproducible, could provide either a modest amount of 1990; Clemen 1996) or other conceptual and therefore useful. useful information at low effort, or more models when using data and professional We limit our discussion to assessing information (or more useful kinds of infor- judgment to identify a small set of impor- instream flow releases for fish. Instream mation) for greater effort. Whether low- tant variables or metrics to evaluate in the flow decisions typically require assessment or high-effort methods are best depends field. This kind of articulation and struc- of other resources such as recreation, aes- both on how much effort can be expended turing of complex professional judgments thetics, channel maintenance, water qual- on a study (what resources—time, exper- also benefits communication by defining ity, riparian vegetation and groundwater, tise, flow, etc.—are available) and on how the problem more clearly and helps make etc. (Annear et al. 2004). DFA is poten- much more useful information the high- more efficient use of resources (Merkhofer tially adaptable to some of these resources, effort methods provide. Early DFA appli- 1990; Morgan and Henrion 1990). but often other tools are required. Similarly, cations tended to be at the low-effort, low Judgment of quantities and probabili- instream flows for fish often vary season- information extreme of this balance, with ties is subject to several well-known kinds ally; separate DFA studies can be made to observers using unstructured and holistic of bias because we often use a set of com- evaluate flow needs for different seasons, judgment to simply rank several alterna- mon heuristics to make mental estimates. or other approaches can be used. tive flows. Sometimes the choice of low For example, when making unconstrained effort appeared motivated not only by a judgments people tend to assume that Demonstration Flow lack of resources but by lack of confidence an event results from a process when the Assessment ProcedureS that higher-effort methods would provide event represents (i.e., fits a preconceived more useful information (EPRI 2000). notion of) the process, to assume events Like many other instream flow meth- The goal of this article is to improve are more likely when examples of them ods, DFA has the purpose of providing the effort–usefulness balance for DFA are easily brought to mind, and to estimate decision-makers with information on how studies by recommending procedures that values by starting with a known value aquatic ecological benefits vary with flow. improve credibility and reproducibility. and adjusting from it, often inadequately The key difference between DFA as we DFA is a “grass roots” method largely lack- (known as “anchoring”; Kahneman and describe it here and other popular meth- ing in published procedures. Professional Tversky 1982). No procedures guarantee ods is that DFA does not use mathemati- judgment and visual observation have the elimination of bias (Lichtenstein et cal models but it does provide quantitative long been used for instream flow assess- al. 1982; Morgan and Henrion 1990), but information on how fish benefits change ment (e.g., Tennant 1976; Tharme 2003), our approach acknowledges and attempts incrementally with flow. This information and several instream flow methods explic- to avoid these and several other types of is gathered by directly observing and delin- itly incorporate judgment (e.g., King and error in expert judgment. Biases due to eating usable habitat during several flows. Louw 1998; Failing et al. 2004). There is preconceived notions (e.g., the belief We describe DFA as five steps that can extensive literature on judgment-based that more flow equates to more fish) or fit within the Instream Flow Incremental environmental decision-making (e.g., stakeholder preferences (e.g., water users Methodology (IFIM) decision-making Keeney and von Winterfeldt 1989; Morgan benefit from lower instream flows) are process as described by Stalnaker et al. and Henrion 1990; Kadvany 1995), and reduced by using field evaluation of several (1995; Figure 1).

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 219 Figure 1. The IFIM is described by Stalnaker et al. (1995) as having five text for the study, conservation organizations. A consulting phases (left column). Our five DFA steps (right column) fit within the and the role of the firm (McBain and Trush, Inc., Arcata, IFIM’s study planning, study implementation, and alternatives analysis phases. study in that context California) was chosen to facilitate the (as in Figure 1). study. The site supports spawning and juve- nile rearing of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus Key procedures and kisutch) and steelhead (O. mykiss), and the uncertainties clear objective of fisheries agencies was for instream flows to enhance the production Selecting how of these anadromous species. The affected many and which stream reach is 7,300 m long, bounded at flows to observe is the upper end by an impassible waterfall a particularly criti- and at the lower end by the confluence cal framing issue for with the mainstem Clackamas River. DFA. This decision Gradient decreases as the mainstem is is a judgment that approached. The assessment team selected strongly affects study two study sites to represent higher and cost and uncer- lower gradients. The lower and upper sites tainty, and subse- were 340 and 500 m in length, totalling quent study design 11% of the affected reach. decisions. Observing The range of feasible instream flow more flows increases releases was established as 0 to 9.2 m3/s. the definition in the The current release of 0 was the baseline; observed relation at 0 release, tributary and groundwater between habitat inflows produce 0.3-0.6 m3/s at the study For each step we describe its objectives, and flow (illustrated sites. The upper limit of 9.2 m3/s was cho- discuss key procedures and uncertainties, at Step 5, below) but increases costs for sen because it approaches the range of and illustrate the step through a case study. field observations, analysis, and released flows that would exist with no diversion at (EPRI 2004 provides additional detail.) water. It may be efficient to select flows all (the pre-dam median summer base flow The case study was conducted below a adaptively, by first observing only a few is estimated to be 10.2 m3/s in average run- hydroelectric diversion on Oak Grove flows over a wide range, possibly using off years and 7.7 in dry years), and because Fork of the Clackamas River, Oregon coarse and less costly metrics (see Step 3), observers could not wade safely at higher (CIFGS 2003). The Oak Grove Fork study and then observing additional flows in the flows. The study team decided to observe preceded and was independent of our work most promising range. seven flows over this range, including the on DFA procedures, but it illustrates many baseline. This investment reflects a desire of our points. The baseline flow to avoid the uncertainties that result when only a few flows are observed and the flow– Step 1: Study Framing The flow existing before new flow habitat area relationship is only coarsely requirements are instituted should be defined. One consequence of this decision “Framing” defines a study’s basic goals included in the observations, even if is that study methods then must be precise and resources and methods available to it is unlikely to be a preferred alterna- enough to distinguish among the seven achieve them. This step settles issues such tive. Habitat quantity at the baseline observed flows. as: flow provides a basis for comparison. For example, three alternative flows might be 1. Who participates in the study and what Step 2: Developing Conceptual determined by the study to provide 2,000, are their roles? Models of Flow Effects 2,200, and 2,500 m2 of habitat. If the base- 2. What resources are targeted, and what line flow provided 1,800 m2, these num- are their management objectives and This step establishes consensus on the bers would indicate that there is a steady priorities? most important ways that flow affects the but not spectacular increase in habitat 3. What study sites are to be used, and how target resources. Conceptual models can with flow, but if the baseline flow provided will results from each be integrated? be thought of as shared assumptions and 500 m2 the interpretation would be that 4. Will different flows be recommended explanations for important processes, used any of the new flows provides a major hab- for different seasons, for wet versus dry to design assessment methods and inter- itat increase. years, etc.? pret results. 5. What range of flows are feasible, for either Case study physical or legal and institution rea- Key procedures and uncertainties sons? How many flows can be observed during the study (so how precisely must In the study framing step of the Oak For DFA, conceptual modeling is when their effects be distinguished?)? Grove Fork case study, the assessment team biological knowledge is most directly identified representatives of the company applied, as participants discuss and docu- Fundamentally, this framing step should operating the diversion, fisheries manage- ment assumptions for how flow affects the identify the larger decision-making con- ment agencies, and non-governmental target resources. Conceptual model devel-

220 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g opment is a hypothesis-generating exercise, with participants dis- cussing alternative models for how flow affects target resources and considering ways that these models can be quantified in the flow observations. Many DFA studies depend mainly on the “habitat selection” conceptual model that is widely used in instream flow assessment (e.g., in the PHABSIM model; Bovee et al. 1998). Habitat selec- tion analysis (a subset of “resource selection” analysis; Manly et al. 2002) identifies the kinds of habitat that fish select (or “prefer”), and assumes that alternatives providing more of the preferred habitat are better. The habitat selection concept has important limitations (EPRI 2000; Garshelis 2000; Manly et al. 2002; Railsback et al. 2003), but remains popular for instream flow assessment. Although its appropriateness remains debated, the conceptual model is simple to apply and habitat selection by fish is relatively easy to observe. A strength of DFA is that studies can also use two other kinds of conceptual models. Mechanistic conceptual models explicitly consider ecological mechanisms by which flow affects fish, such as by scouring or drying redds or producing food. Theoretical con- ceptual models may be useful for complex resources and when mechanisms are too numerous or poorly understood. For example, if a study’s target resource is a native warmwater community, the most useful conceptual model may be the theoretical assump- tion that biological diversity increases with habitat diversity (Schlosser 1982; Lobb and Orth 1991; Aadland 1993). (Example DFA methods for warmwater communities are in EPRI 2004.) Each kind of conceptual model has limitations leading to uncertainty in assessment results. For habitat selection model- ing, it may be only approximately correct (or even incorrect) that habitat types where fish are most often observed is high-value habitat or that population status varies directly with the area of selected habitat (Railsback et al. 2003). For mechanistic mod- els, uncertainty is increased if key mechanisms are neglected or mischaracterized. For theoretical conceptual models, uncertainty arises from using a very coarse model of complicated aquatic communities.

Case study

The Oak Grove Fork assessment team used the following sequence of assumptions to define two conceptual models of how flow affects the management goal of enhancing coho salmon and steelhead production. Each assumption was debated and judged by consensus to be a useful approximation. 1. Production of adult salmon and steelhead is enhanced by pro- ducing more and bigger smolts. 2. One important way flow affects smolt production is by affecting availability of spawning habitat. 3. Availability of foraging habitat for fry is not an important way flow affects smolt production because fry habitat was assumed sufficient at all flows. 4. Availability of foraging habitat for age-1 coho salmon and age-2 steelhead (“juveniles”) is an important way flow affects smolt production. Flows sufficient for age-2 steelhead are also sufficient for age-1 steelhead. 5. The habitat selection approach is useful for defining spawn- Vemco ing and juvenile foraging habitat, as highly selected habitat

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 221 (habitat types where fish are observed ducibility, spatial resolution, and biologi- PHABSIM “criteria curves” that assume in high densities) is assumed highly cal resolution. effects of habitat variables (often, depth, productive. Reproducibility is essential for any sci- velocity, and substrate type) are indepen- entific study and especially important for dent, range from 0.0 to 1.0, and are easy Consequently, the first conceptual overcoming DFA’s reputation for subjec- to use during DFA observations. However, model addressed juvenile foraging. This tivity. Reproducibility can be provided by: this simplified approach to habitat criteria model is that smolt abundance and size is outdated (Vadas and Orth 2001; Manly et • Documenting assumptions about increase with the area of highly selected al. 2002) and has been found less accurate factors affecting habitat selection, habitat for juvenile foraging. The second than more sophisticated approaches (e.g., such as the size of fish being evaluated, conceptual model is that spawning success Ahmadi-Nedush et al. 2006). Experienced their activity (e.g., daytime foraging, increases with the area of highly selected observers may have a more nuanced under- nighttime foraging, spawning, winter spawning habitat. standing of how habitat variables interact to sheltering), and site conditions The team’s second conceptual model affect fish. Because habitat preferences vary that affect habitat selection. considers mechanistic effects of flow on with factors including fish size, competi- spawning. Instream flow was judged to • Using enough habitat types to tion, temperature, and turbidity (Railsback affect the risk of a redd being scoured out represent the conceptual models et al. 2003), PHABSIM criteria should be by high flows during incubation. Spawning but not so many that it is difficult avoided if they are not from clearly similar in the deepest parts of the channel places to classify observations. (Think sites (or if it is not clear what kind of condi- redds at higher risk of scouring during about organizing music at a record tions they represent). uncontrolled high flows, so spawning habi- shop. Using more categories gives Spatial resolution is critical in any eco- tat is more valuable if it is not in the deep- customers more information about logical study (e.g., Starfield and Bleloch est part of the channel. This conceptual the music in each bin, but also 1986; Manly et al. 2002) because ecologi- model was based on a mechanism plausible makes it harder to decide which bin cal relationships can change with scale. a particular recording should be in.) at this site where redds are likely to be cre- Using an inappropriate resolution or mix- Hierarchical habitat classification ated during base flows but then exposed to ing resolutions is a common, major, yet schemes (e.g., Vadas and Orth 1998) spill flows. poorly understood source of uncertainty may allow more types to be used with The case study illustrates several in instream flow studies (Railsback 1999). less difficulty categorizing habitat. important points. First, the number of Corsi et al. (2000) introduce scale issues in conceptual models strongly affects both • Documenting the characteristics of habitat modeling, Scott et al. (2002; Part the study’s effort and its uncertainty. More each habitat type, whether those 2) cover them extensively, and Railsback conceptual models, and more realistic characteristics are based on judgment, (1999) illustrates their relevance to models, may seem important for accuracy, data, or other information. instream flow assessment. The spatial resolution of a habitat met- and uncertainty will be high if important • Ensuring that habitat types can ric is the area over which habitat condi- processes are ignored or misunderstood. actually be distinguished during tions are aggregated during observations. Yet too many conceptual models could observations. Depth and substrate For territorial fish such as drift-feeding be too expensive to evaluate and too hard type, for example, might be useful salmonids, the feeding territory size is an to integrate into meaningful conclusions. for defining habitat types in clear, appropriate minimum observation area. Second, while habitat selection is used wadeable streams but unobservable Quantifying habitat at finer scales than a widely in instream flow assessment, other in deep, turbid rivers. In large and turbid streams, metrics could be territory size is inappropriate because habi- kinds of conceptual models (here, mecha- tat value to the fish is determined by all nisms driving redd survival) can be impor- based on such variables as the size and relative frequency of habitat the conditions throughout its territory, not tant and easily incorporated. unit and cover types (Lobb and just at any spot within the territory, and Orth 1991; Aadland 1993). because a patch of otherwise good habitat Step 3: Selecting Habitat Metrics is not useful if it is too small to support • Ensuring that metrics do not change one fish. (An isolated 0.1 2m patch with during an assessment. “Creep” in the Now the specific metrics that will be perfect velocity and depth for adult trout definition of habitat types is likely as quantified during the field observations feeding should not be counted as habitat observers gain experience. Practice of Step 4 are defined. Habitat metrics are because it is much smaller that a trout’s using the habitat metrics (e.g., the specific types of habitat that observ- territory.) Many warmwater fish use entire during observation of the existing ers will quantify during the demonstration channel units (pools, riffles), so their habi- base flow) is essential for avoiding flows, and are defined from the conceptual tat metrics should be at the channel unit creep; ambiguous metrics or protocols models. scale (e.g., Vadas and Orth 1998). Spatial can be identified and changed. resolutions are often specified only approx- Key procedures and uncertainties In some DFA studies, observers used imately, and habitat can be quantified over published PHABSIM habitat suitability areas greater than (but not less than) the The habitat metrics are essentially criteria to supplement their judgment. chosen spatial resolution. models of ecological processes, so avoid- While supplementing judgment with “hard Biological resolution refers to how many ing uncertainty requires consideration of data” is attractive, PHABSIM criteria metrics are used to represent how many three ecological modeling issues: repro- should be used judiciously. The traditional resources. The Oak Grove team realized,

222 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g as have others (e.g., Loar et al. 1985; Studley et al. 1996), that habitat-based methods cannot predict how different fish groups respond to flow when those groups use the same habitat. If, for example, adults of two trout species both use the same foraging habitat, doubling the area of this habitat will probably not double the abundance of both species; instead, new habitat may be domi- nated by one species. The inability to resolve between fish groups with similar habitat requirements means that an instream flow study has limited biological resolution. If habitat metrics for two groups of fish cannot be clearly distinguished, then the groups must be combined in the assessment.

Case study

The Oak Grove team arrived at three habitat metrics: (1) coho salmon and steelhead spawning habitat—the area of habitat judged to be high quality for spawning, (2) coho salmon foraging habitat—the area of habitat judged to be highly selected by age one and older coho salmon for foraging, and (3) steelhead forag- ing habitat—the area of habitat judged to be highly selected for foraging by age two and older steelhead. Reproducibility, spatial resolution, and biological resolution were considered explicitly. Concerning reproducibility, the team decided that their met- rics should not include separate delineation of “marginal” and “good” habitat, but instead to delineate only clearly good habitat. This decision reduces the number of judgments and the opportu- nities for subjectivity, keeps field observations from being overly complex, and avoids, in the analysis step, the difficult problem of comparing marginal habitat to good habitat. Further, the team agreed that habitat metrics should be based on relatively well- defined and observable variables. Therefore, judgment of spawn- ing habitat should be based mainly on availability of appropriate depths, velocities, and gravel sizes; and judgment of foraging habitat should consider proximity to velocities that provide drift food, availability of velocity shelters to reduce swimming speeds, and proximity to hiding cover. The assessment team explicitly discussed and selected a mini- mum size for delineated habitat areas, essentially the spatial resolution of field observations. They recognized that very small patches of habitat occur in complex habitats (e.g., small eddies in boulder gardens), but trying to identify such small patches would be impractical and uncertain, and very small patches are of less biological value (e.g., too small to support even one fish). Hence, they chose a minimum patch size of two square meters. Concerning biological resolution, the team agreed that spawn- ing habitat for coho salmon and steelhead could not be distin- guished, so one spawning habitat metric applied to both species. However, they also agreed that coho salmon generally use lower velocities than steelhead, so separate foraging habitat metrics are needed.

Step 4: Designing and Conducting Field Observations

In Step 4 the habitat metrics are quantified at the different demonstration flows. Decisions include determining who partici- pates in the observations, how to quantify the habitat metrics, Vemco and which types of uncertainty to address and how.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 223 Key procedures and uncertainties may have no significant effect on results. uncertainty among observers can be evalu- If disagreements are many and consistent, ated by having each participant delineate Delineating habitat metrics by mark- then it may be necessary to analyze sepa- habitat separately (which can also help ing patches of each type on a base map rate delineations produced by different calibrate individual or group judgments). has been found (especially in the Oak participants; causes of disagreement (e.g., Grove Fork study) to let field observers consistent differences in judgment of what Case study quantify the metrics rapidly and with a constitutes highly selected habitat) should level of precision judged to be adequate, be documented for consideration in the The case study delineated habitat while avoiding anchoring biases associated Step 5 analysis. If disagreement in habi- metrics by drawing patch boundaries on with simply judging the size of each patch. tat delineation leads to different analysis highly detailed base maps. Available aerial Much of Step 4’s effort and cost therefore is results (e.g., different trends in how habi- photographs were unusable as base maps likely to be devoted to developing detailed tat metrics vary with flow; differences in because overhanging trees obscured the and accurate base maps. Uncertainties and which flow produces the highest metrics), channel. (Reflected sunlight is another inaccuracies in field observations can be the analysis can treat the differences as a common problem.) McBain and Trush, source of uncertainty that must be consid- reduced by providing maps with an abun- Inc. used a balloon-mounted photogra- dance of landmarks, e.g., boulders and ered in the instream flow decision. phy system (Floatograph Technologies, trees. An observation team needs a leader to Napa, California); three technicians pho- Selecting the team of field observers is draw the group’s habitat delineation onto tographed the study reach from an eleva- critical for both the study’s scientific credi- the map, mediate disagreements, forge tion of about 15 m, during a low flow. bility and for its success as a decision-mak- consensus, and keep the team moving. It ing process. Limiting observers to a few is typically best to explicitly select a leader The photographs were digitally rectified highly qualified scientists may cause some that the participants feel is fair and able to and assembled into composites (Figure stakeholders to feel excluded and reduce address challenges reliably, instead of leav- 2). Developing the maps required several their confidence in, and commitment to, ing this role to be filled by the most force- person-weeks of research, field time, and the results. But including all stakehold- ful personality. Consensus formation will computer processing, especially to rectify ers regardless of expertise could compro- depend both on leadership and a team goal and combine approximately 200 photos. mise the credibility of the results even if of developing the best possible analysis. The assessment team considered which the team as a whole is well-qualified. Any Concern about uncertainty in DFA among its members had sufficient experi- stakeholders whose representatives in the usually focuses on the visual observations, ence observing the target fish to participate overall decision process are not well-quali- because these are the key difference from in the habitat delineation, and determined fied for the field observations could choose model-based approaches. Several sources (using unreported criteria) that all mem- to recruit field observers they believe to be of uncertainty could affect the field obser- bers were qualified. The habitat delinea- both qualified and not biased against the vation step, though they may not be the tions were carried out by separate teams stakeholder’s values. Establishing expertise most important uncertainties overall. (1) for each site. Two demonstration flows thresholds for observers early in the study Observers can be biased by preconceived could be evaluated each day (including the (in Step 1, or early in Step 4) is recom- notions or desired outcomes, although the time for changing and measuring the dam mended to reduce the potential for con- use of specific shared metrics should reduce release) and the seven flows were observed flict over inclusion. Criteria for inclusion this uncertainty. (2) Habitat metrics can be within four consecutive days. The group on the observer team should include famil- inconsistent, changing over time or vary- discussed each patch that contained habi- iarity with the target species and the bio- ing among observers. (3) There is error tat as defined by the three metrics, and logical processes of the conceptual models and variability in habitat quantification, the facilitator drew the patch on the base identified in Step 2, and field experience e.g., uncertainty in visual observations due map after its boundaries were agreed upon. observing these species and processes. to habitat varying too gradually to delin- Field assistants measured depth and veloc- Finally, team members need to remember eate habitat types sharply. (4) There can ity as requested, allowing team members that they are collecting data, not making be error in measuring and controlling the to re-calibrate their mental estimates of decisions. flow rates during observations (a challenge these variables and their judgments based During observations, it is desirable at Oak Grove Fork because of groundwater to encourage all members of the team to inflows and a lack of good gaging sites). on them. express their judgment instead of letting Some DFA studies may choose to a single person or perspective dominate; a quantify uncertainty in the habitat area Step 5: Analysis continual dialog provides checks and bal- estimates. Whether and how to do so must ances. One way to encourage participants be decided in advance of field observa- The final step analyzes field data with to think independently is for each person tions because the decision affects how data the objective of producing the assess- to delineate an area’s habitat on their own are collected. There are several potential ment results, a summary of how well each map, then develop a consensus delinea- approaches. (1) Uncertainty in the area of alternative instream flow meets aquatic tion, all before moving on to the next area. each habitat patch can be quantified, e.g., resource management objectives identi- When the group cannot arrive at a con- by estimating the minimum and maximum fied in the study framing step. If field data sensus in delineating a patch of habitat, extent of each patch. (2) Uncertainty in on uncertainty in habitat quantification separate delineations can be made for each the entire study can be estimated by quan- were collected, they are also analyzed at opinion. If disagreements are few, they tifying habitat several times. (3) Bias and this point.

224 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Figure 2. Example base map and field habitat delineation from the Oak Grove Fork study. The white curve is a digitization of patches of coho salmon foraging habitat delineated by observers at a demonstration flow of 2.3 3m /s, in a small portion of the study site. (Figure reproduced from CIFGS 2003.)

Key procedures and uncertainties Figure 3. Example results of the Oak Grove Fork DFA study, for one study site. The graph shows The analysis of DFA results to recom- the total area of habitat for the three metrics (foraging habitat for coho salmon and steelhead; mend instream flows is much like analysis spawning habitat) at each of the seven demonstration flows. of PHABSIM results. Relations between flow and habitat may differ strongly among target species and life stages (e.g., between coho salmon and steelhead in the case study, below) and these differences must be resolved. In all habitat-based studies, the relation between habitat area and popula- tion response is a fundamental uncertainty. This approach cannot predict population responses so its use implies an assumption that trends in habitat area produce similar trends in population. The assessment team can use a mixture of quantitative analysis, qualitative judgment, and consensus forma- tion to make final flow comparisons. The team’s judgment should be guided by the conceptual models developed in Step 2 and thoroughly documented. Final instream flow recommendations, of course, consider all the resources affected by flow.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 225 Case study of other flows requires interpolation References between, or extrapolation from, For analysis, McBain and Trush, Inc. results from the observed flows. Aadland, L. P. 1993. Stream habitat types: digitized the habitat patches delineated their fish assemblages and relationship to 7. DFA requires extensive field in field observations so patch areas could flow. North American Journal of Fisheries be computed and summed. Then results time by a number of people, in Management 13:790-806. from each study site (e.g., Figure 3) were addition to the effort of developing Ahmadi-Nedush, B., A. St-Hilaire, M. weighted by the river length represented maps and analyzing results. Bérubé, É. Robichaud, N. Thiémonge, by the site, and combined into total met- 8. DFA could be difficult to apply where and B. Bobée. 2006. A review of statisti- cal methods for the evaluation of aquatic rics for entire reach. flows are not controlled by a dam. The case study analysis found that some habitat suitability for instream flow assess- habitat metrics varied sharply and incon- Dependence on judgment in environ- ment. River Research and Applications sistently as flow increased (Figure 3). For mental decision support studies is unavoid- 22:503-523. Annear, T., and 15 others. 2004. Instream example, coho salmon habitat increased as able and does not necessarily reduce the flows for riverine resource stewardship, flow increased from 0.3 to 1.0 m3/s, then quality of decisions; judgment is neces- revised edition. Instream Flow Council, decreased sharply as flow further increased sary because data and models are inher- Cheyenne, Wyoming. above 2 m3/s, and then increased again ently uncertain and decisions inherently Bovee, K. D., B. L. Lamb, J. M. Bartholow, between 4.7 and 6.5 m3/s. Interpolating a involve values (Gregory et al. 2006). The C. B. Stalnaker, J. Taylor, and J. “best” flow for each species and life stage DFA procedure we describe is intended Henriksen. 1998. Stream habitat analy- would have been quite uncertain if fewer sis using the Instream Flow Incremental flows had been observed. to control subjectivity and uncertainty by using established ecological and deci- Methodology. U. S. Geological Survey, USGS/BRD-1998-0004, Fort Collins, sion analysis frameworks. Biological Conclusions Colorado. knowledge and judgment are applied and Budnitz, R., G. Apostolakis, D. Boore, In deciding whether DFA is an appro- documented, especially in the conceptual L. Cluff, K. Coppersmith, C. Cornell, priate method for an instream flow assess- modeling and metric development steps. and P. Morris. 1998. Use of technical ment, its following characteristics deserve Explicitly defining, delineating, and quan- expert panels: applications to probabilis- consideration. tifying habitat metrics helps make results tic seismic hazard analysis. Risk Analysis 18:463-469. 1. Because DFA does not require quantitative and defensible. CIFGS (Clackamas Instream Flow / hydraulic simulation, assessment Our case study was high-effort and Geomorphology Subgroup). 2003. of habitat with complex hydraulics produced extensive data and analy- Estimating salmonid habitat availability is more feasible. However, high sis. However, lower-effort (but carefully in the Lower Oak Grove Fork using expert depth, velocity, or turbidity can designed) DFA studies may be as appro- habitat mapping, summary of methods limit how observations are made priate as any other method for target and preliminary results. Report pre- (e.g., by limiting how much of a site resources so complex or poorly understood pared by McBain and Trush Inc., Arcata, can be waded, or how accurately that higher effort produces little more use- California, for Clackamas Instream Flow habitat metrics can be estimated). / Geomorphology Subgroup, 5 March ful information. If we lack reliable math- 2. A DFA study can assess long 2003. ematical models of how instream flow reaches fairly quickly, whereas Clemen, R. 1996. Making hard decisions: an affects a resource (e.g., the biodiversity nd approaches requiring hydraulic introduction to decision analysis, 2 edi- modeling are often constrained of an unstudied warmwater community), tion. Duxbury, Belmont, California. to a small number of transects. then a low-resolution DFA—perhaps Corsi, F., J. de Leeuw, and A. Skidmore. based on theoretical conceptual models— 2000. Modeling species distributions with 3. Being explicitly judgment-based, DFA GIS. Pages 389-434 in L. Boitani, and can encourage open consideration might be appropriate, especially if it frees resources for purposes such as monitoring T. K. Fuller, eds. Research techniques in and revision of the many assumptions animal ecology, controversies and con- and watershed restoration. and judgments that are involved sequences. Columbia University Press, in any instream flow study. New York. 4. Uncertainty in field observations Acknowledgements EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute) of habitat metrics is often of 2000. Instream flow assessment methods: special interest in DFA studies. This work was sponsored by EPRI, the guidance for evaluating instream flow There are several ways this Electric Power Research Institute, under needs in hydropower licensing. Technical uncertainty can be quantified. agreement EP-P1149/C433 with Lang, Report 1000554, EPRI, Palo Alto, California. 5. DFA facilitates use of mechanistic Railsback and Assoc. Doug Dixon was _____. 2004. Demonstration flow assessment: and theoretical conceptual EPRI’s project manager. The authors thank procedures for judgement-based instream Geoff Hales, Scott and Becky McBain, models in addition to, or flow studies. Technical Report 1005389, instead of, habitat selection. and Bill Trush for information on the Oak EPRI, Palo Alto, California. 6. A DFA study can quantify habitat at Grove Fork study; and Ken Cummins, Bret Failing, L., G. Horn, and P. Higgins. 2004. only a few discrete flows, so assessment Harvey, and John Williams for input. Using expert judgment and stakeholder

226 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g values to evaluate adaptive management options. Ecology and a primer for IFIM. Biological Report 29, U.S. Department of Society 9:13. Available at: www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol9/iss1/ Interior, National Biological Service, Washington, D.C. art13. Starfield, A. M., and A. L. Bleloch. 1986. Building models for con- Garshelis, D. L. 2000. Delusions in habitat evaluation: measuring servation and wildlife management. Burgess International Group, use, selection, and importance. Pages 111-164 in L. Boitani, and T. K. Fuller, eds. Research techniques in animal ecology, contro- Edina, Minnesota. versies and consequences, Columbia University Press, New York. Studley, T. K., J. E. Baldrige, and S. F. Railsback. 1996. Predicting Gregory, R., L. Failing, D. Ohlson, and T. L. McDaniels. 2006. fish population response to instream flows. Hydro Review Some pitfalls of an overemphasis on science in environmental risk 15(6):48-57. management decisions. Journal of Risk Research 9:717-735. Tennant, D. L. 1976. Instream flow requirements for fish, wildlife, Kadvany, J. 1995. From comparative risk to decision analysis: rank- ing solutions to multiple-value environmental problems. Risk: recreation, and related environmental resources. Pages 359-373 Health, Safety and Environment 6:333-358. in J. F. Orsborn and C. H. Allman, eds. Symposium and specialty Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky (editors). 1982. Judgement under conference on instream flow needs. American Fisheries Society, uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, Bethesda, Maryland. New York. Tharme, R. E. 2003. A global perspective on environmental flow Keeney, R., and D. von Winterfeldt. 1989. On the uses of expert judgment on complex technical problems. IEEE Transactions on assessment: emerging trends in the development and application Engineering Management 36:83-86. of environmental flow methodologies for rivers. River Research King, J., and D. Louw. 1998. Instream flow assessments for regulated and Applications 19:397–441. rivers in South Africa using the Building Block Methodology. Vadas, R. L. J., and D. J. Orth. 1998. Use of physical variables to Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management 1:109-124. discriminate visually determined mesohabitat types in North Lichtenstein, S., B. Fischhoff, and L. D. Phillips. 1982. Calibration of probabilities: the state of the art to 1980. Pages 306-334 in D. American streams. Rivers 6:143-159. Kahneman and A. Tversky, eds. Judgement under uncertainty: _____. 2001. Formulation of habitat suitability models for stream heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, New York. fish guilds: do the standard methods work? Transactions of the Loar, J. M., M. J. Sale, G. F. Cada, D. K. Cox, R. M. Cushman, American Fisheries Society 130:217-235. G. K. Eddlemon, J. L. Elmore, A. J. Gatz, P. Kanciruk, J. A. Watson, D., and D. Buede. 1987. Decision synthesis: the principles Solomon, and D. S. Vaughan. 1985. Application of habitat evalu- and practice of decision analysis. Cambridge University Press, ation models in southern Appalachian streams. ORNL/TM-9323, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. New York. Lobb, M. D. I., and D. J. Orth. 1991. Habitat use by an assemblage of fish in a large warmwater stream. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 120:65-78. Manly, B. F. J., L. L. McDonald, D. L. Thomas, T. L. McDonald, and W. P. Erickson. 2002. Resource selection by animals, statisti- cal design and analysis for field studies, second edition. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston. Merkhofer, M. 1990. Using influence diagrams in multiattribute util- ity analysis—improving effectiveness through improving commu- nication. Pages 297-317 in R. M. Oliver and J. Q. Smith, eds. Influence diagrams, belief nets and decision analysis. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Morgan, M. G., and M. Henrion. 1990. Uncertainty: a guide to dealing with uncertainty in quantitative risk and policy analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York. Payne, J., J. Bettman, and E. Johnson. 1993. The adaptive decision- maker. Cambridge University Press, New York. Railsback, S. F. 1999. Reducing uncertainties in instream flow stud- ies. Fisheries 24(4):24-26. Railsback, S. F., H. B. Stauffer, and B. C. Harvey. 2003. What can habitat preference models tell us? Tests using a virtual trout population. Ecological Applications 13:1580-1594. Schlosser, I. J. 1982. Fish community structure and function along two habitat gradients in a headwater stream. Ecological Monographs 52:395-414. Scott, J. M, P. J. Heglund, M. L. Morrison, J. B. Haufler, M. G. Raphael, W. A. Wall, and F. B. Samson (editors). 2002. Predicting species occurrences: issues of accuracy and scale. Island Press, Washington, D. C. Llittle River Research and Design Stalnaker, C., B. L. Lamb, J. Henriksen, K. Bovee, and J. Bartholow. 1995. The Instream Flow Incremental Methodology,

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 227 FEATURE: FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

Management Concerns about Known and Potential Impacts of Lead Use in Shooting and in Fishing Activities ABSTRACT: We present a summary of the technical review, jointly requested by the American Fisheries Society and The Wildlife Society, addressing the hazards to wildlife resulting from lead objects or fragments introduced into aquatic and terrestrial environments from the use of ammunition and fishing tackle. Impacts from lead are well documented in humans, aswell as in terrestrial and aquatic organisms. Concern about impacts from lead ammunition and fishing tackle has resulted in the development of non-lead alternatives, educational campaigns, and regulations to restrict their use. This article discusses the general biological impacts of lead exposure from fishing and shooting activities to fish, wildlife, and humans; summarizes existing and proposed regulations to reduce lead exposure to biota; reviews alternatives to lead materials that are currently available for fishing; and outlines options for further actions to reduce wildlife and human exposure to lead from fishing activities.

Chris I. Goddard, Previsiones de Manejo Acerca Nancy J. Leonard, de Impactos Conocidos y Doug L. Stang, P. Jack Wingate, Potenciales del Uso de Plomo en Barnett A. Rattner, Actividades de Caza y Pesca J. Christian Franson, and RESUMEN: Presentamos un resumen de la opinión técnica solicitada por la Sociedad Steven R. Sheffield Americana de Pesquerías y la Sociedad para la Vida Silvestre con respecto a los peligros para la vida silvestre que resultan de la introducción de objetos o fragmentos Goddard is the executive secretary of the Great de plomo a los ambientes acuáticos y terrestres, provenientes del uso de municiones y Lakes Commission at the Great Lakes equipos de pesca. El efecto del plomo está bien documentado en humanos, así como Fishery Commission, Ann Arbor, Michigan, también en organismos terrestres y acuáticos. La preocupación acerca de los efectos and can be contacted at [email protected]. de la presencia de plomo proveniente de municiones y equipos de pesca ha resultado Leonard is an academic specialist at the Center en el desarrollo de diseños alternativos libres de plomo, campañas educativas y for Systems Integration and Sustainability, regulaciones para restringir su uso. En este artículo se discuten los impactos biológicos Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, generales en peces, vida silvestre y humanos de la exposición al plomo derivado Michigan State University, East Lansing. Stang de la caza y pesca; se hace un resumen de las regulaciones tendientes a reducir la is assistant director at the Bureau of Fisheries, exposición de la biota al plomo; se hace una revisión de los materiales alternativos al New York State Department of Environmental plomo disponibles para las actividades de pesca, y se proponen posteriores acciones Conservation, Albany. Wingate is a fisheries tendientes a reducir la exposición humana y de la vida silvestre al plomo producido research manager who is retired from the por las actividades de pesca. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, St. Paul. Rattner is an ecotoxicologist at Introduction oil, and waste; release of contaminated the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, tailings from mining and smelting activi- Beltsville Laboratory, U.S. Geological Survey, Lead (Pb), being one of the easiest ties; the application of products containing Beltsville, Maryland. Franson is a research metals to mine and smelt (Pattee and lead; and through the loss of lead objects, wildlife at the National Wildlife Pain 2003), has been extracted and such as lead shot and fishing weights (IPCS Health Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 1989; Henny et al. 1994; Scheuhammer and Madison, Wisconsin. Sheffield is a professor used by societies for numerous pur- at the Department of Natural Sciences, Bowie poses at least as far back in time as the Norris 1995). State University, Bowie, Maryland and at the Roman Empire (Hernberg 2000). Lead Lead is a nonessential heavy metal with National Capital Region—Northern Virginia can be introduced into the environ- no known beneficial role in biological sys- Center of the College of Natural Resources, ment from multiple sources including tems. The adverse effects of lead on human Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State surface runoff; atmospheric deposition health have long been recognized. Exposure University, Falls Church. associated with the burning of coal, of humans to lead is known to adversely

228 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g affect hematopoiesis, the central and periph- bance (e.g., water flow rate), grain size of die-offs have been reported from this area eral nervous systems, the renal system, car- soils and sediments, gaseous aerobic con- since the early 1900s. Humans exposed diovascular system, and can result in brain ditions, and acidity and alkalinity. Under to lead have experienced similar nega- dysfunction, neuropathy, altered amino acid some conditions (e.g., soft acidic waters, tive effects to those described for fish and transport, anemia, impaired fetal develop- mechanical disturbance), lead can be wildlife. ment, and reduced survival (Nordic Council released from artifacts, although annual Due to their intended scope, the afore- of Ministers 2003; Khan 2005). Some studies corrosion rates of lead are generally low mentioned studies do not investigate the have associated elevated bone or blood lead (Jacks and Bystrom 1995). Due to the pos- effects of bioavailable lead from spent levels with aggression, delinquent behavior sible dissolution of lead ammunition and ammunition or from lost fishing tackle. (Needleman 2004), and attention deficit fishing tackle, we review briefly the find- Lead objects can dissolve under certain hyperactivity disorder (Braun et al. 2006). ings from studies examining the effects conditions, thereby contaminating soil, Although the adverse effects of lead on of bioavailable lead on living organisms, sediment, and vegetation, and resulting human health have long been recognized, including fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, in exposure of biota via ingestion of soil, the exposure of fish, wildlife, and humans to mammals, and humans. sediment, food, and water. Nevertheless, lead continues (Hernberg 2000). In field and laboratory studies, lead for bioavailable lead arising from ammuni- In comparison to the long-standing is generally found to evoke its toxicity tion and fishing tackle to have significant recognition of the effects of lead poison- in multiple organ systems. Perhaps best effects on biota at the organism- or popu- ing in humans, the hazard of lead ammu- known are inhibition of heme-synthesis lation-level, the quantity of shot or tackle nition and fishing sinkers to wildlife has enzymes, lead-induced anemia, central lost within a given area would have to be only recently been acknowledged (Pattee and peripheral neuropathy, nephrotoxic- substantial. and Pain 2003). In this article we present a ity, hypertension, and alteration to endo- summary of the technical review that was crine and reproductive function. Lead is Lead Exposure Related jointly requested by the American Fisheries also known to be a carcinogen for some to Shooting Activities Society and The Wildlife Society (Rattner animals (Needleman 2004). Numerous et al. 2008). Specifically, we review briefly studies have examined the effects of lead The effects of spent lead shot and bullets the effects of lead introduced by fishing on fish. It is well known that bioavailable on American wildlife has been recognized and shooting activities to living organ- lead principally accumulates in the gills, since the 1870s (Sanderson and Bellrose isms, discuss regulations and alternatives liver, kidney, and bone; can evoke mor- 1986), but it wasn’t until the 1959 pub- to lead to reduce exposure, and suggest phological lesions (e.g., erosion of caudal lication by Bellrose, “Lead poisoning as a possible actions that may further minimize fin, spinal deformities); alters physiological mortality factor in waterfowl populations,” lead introductions into the environment function (e.g., enzyme inhibition, anemia, that the widespread hazard of spent lead from fishing. decreased survival); and impairs avoidance shot was fully appreciated. The availabil- behavior (IPCS 1989). The report compiled ity of spent lead in a terrestrial setting is Dissolution of Lead by International Programme on Chemical a function of the depth these particulates from Spent Ammunition Safety (IPCS 1989) also summarized stud- are located in soil or sediment. Several and Fishing Tackle ies on effects of lead on amphibians, which investigations have demonstrated that include arrested development and delayed shot accumulates in most sediment near Spent lead ammunition and lost lead hatching. Similarly, while their review was the surface and, thus, the total number of fishing tackle are not readily dissolved not focused solely on lead sources linked shot available can increase in density and in aquatic and terrestrial systems and, directly to hunting and fishing activities, availability over time (Pain 1992). In an depending on environmental conditions, Patte and Pain (2003) considered the aquatic setting, spent lead shot availability can be relatively stable and remain intact literature about lead in the environment is affected by water depth and the depth for decades to centuries (SAAMI 1996). and identified many existing studies perti- that the shot is buried within the sedi- Lead from spent ammunition and tackle nent to this focus on lead exposures. For ment. With the popularity of sport shoot- can undergo weathering and lead salts can example, studies in the Coeur d’Alene ing (target, trap, and skeet shooting) and dissociate, form stable complexes (car- floodplain, which is heavily contaminated firearms training in the United States and bonates, hydrides, chlorides), precipitate by heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, and elsewhere, an estimated 72,600,000 kg per (phosphates, sulfides, carbonates, hydrox- zinc from mining and smelting activities, year of lead is deposited at 9,000 shooting ides), become bound to soil and sediments, have also detected negative effects from ranges (USEPA 2001). The amount of lead and thus exist in many forms with varying the accidental ingestion of lead-contami- shot deposited in waterfowl hunting areas degrees of bioavailability. Uptake of lead nated food or the accidental ingestion of has been estimated to range from 125,970 by plants is relatively limited, although lead associated with sediments in osprey to 5,000,000 shot per hectare (Bellrose several studies have documented elevated (Pandion haliaetus), raptors, songbirds, and 1959; Pain 1992, respectively). It is gener- lead concentrations in plants in the vicin- tundra swan (Cygnus columbianus; Henny ally accepted that shot density in a field ity of shooting ranges (Rooney et al. 1999; 2003). These negative effects included or wetland is directly related to hunting or Hui 2002; Cao et al. 2003; also reviewed inhibition of delta-aminolevulinic acid shooting intensity. in Rattner et al. 2008). Weathering and dehydratase involved in heme synthesis, Documentation of fish ingesting spent dissolution of elemental lead is influenced elevated lead levels in blood and tissues, lead bullets or shot was not found. Also, by water chemistry, mechanical distur- and weight loss. In addition, waterfowl evidence was not found that ingestion of

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 229 lead shot and lead bullets by amphibians of lead in California condor (Gymnogyps of activity such as distance from or reptiles is a widespread problem, and californianus) habitats in California the shoreline or boat, the type of aquatic there is limited information documenting and Arizona, in conjunction with their habitat that may increase gear breakage the incidence of lead shot, bullets, frag- extreme sensitivity to lead toxicity, has and loss, and angler skill. Based on inter- ments, or fishing sinkers in the digestive been suggested as the primary threat to the views, Radomski et al. (2006) reported system of these vertebrates. Lance et al. continued existence of the species (Pattee average loss rates of 0.0127 lures per hour, (2006) reported reproductive failure in et al. 1990; Meretsky et al. 2000). Recent 0.0081 large sinkers per hour, 0.0057 split captive American alligator (Alligator mis- evidence indicates that lead ammunition shot sinkers per hour, 0.0247 jigs per hour, sissippiensis) that was potentially associated embedded in carcasses of hunted game and 0.0257 hooks per hour; while Duerr with lead exposure. These alligators were and mammalian predators (coyotes, Canis (1999), assessing the amount of lead fish- fed wild nutria (Myocastor coypus) meat latrans) or gut piles are the main sources ing tackle lost and detected along shore- contaminated with lead shot, and the alli- of the lead accumulated by California con- lines, estimated that there was from 0.0 to gators’ eggs’ yolk had a high lead concen- dors (Church et al. 2006). 0.01 sinkers per square meter in areas of tration (Lance et al. 2006). Ingestion of Ingestion of lead shot and bullets by low angling pressure and 0.47 sinkers per lead shot was also observed in other farmed humans, or the associated dust when square meter in areas of high angling pres- American alligators (Camus et al. 1998) casting ammunition has received con- sure. Some reports suggest that loss of lead and Australian crocodiles (Crocodylus siderable attention (reviewed by CPSB fishing tackle in the aquatic environment porosus; Hammerton et al. 2003). In gen- 2002). There are numerous case reports can be substantial (e.g., Scheuhammer eral, studies with sites in close proximity of accidental or purposeful (pica) inges- and Norris 1995). to shooting ranges have found elevated tion of lead shot by humans in the medical Fish most frequently ingest, partially concentrations of lead in the tissues of literature (Gustavsson and Gerhardsson or wholly, fishing tackle when hooked. amphibians and reptiles, which is thought 2005). Ingestion of lead shot and bullets Whether the fishing tackle remains in the to be due to ingestion of lead with water can cause lead intoxication, and depend- fish depends on whether the angler success- and food items (Pattee and Pain 2003). ing on number and mass of fragments, lead fully lands the fish and whether the hook Birds can ingest spent bullets, shot, lodged in certain but not all tissues can is too deeply ingested to safely remove it or their fragments. Ingestion most likely result in toxicity (Khan 2005). Accidental from the fish. The abandonment of fish occurs due to the bird mistaking these lead ingestion of ammunition by children has hooks and associated fishing tackle may artifacts for food or grit material (Sanderson been documented (Durback et al. 1989). arise due to an angler breaking the line and Bellrose 1986; Scheuhammer and Furthermore, many sportsmen reloading with a fish on, or leaving deeply set hooks Norris 1995). Waterfowl have been docu- rifle and pistol ammunition cast their own in the fish to reduce injury (Cooke et al. mented to die from ingesting lead shotgun lead bullets, an activity particularly popu- 2001). Most reported mortality associated pellets deposited on the bottom of lakes, in lar with black powder shooters, which with fishing tackle is not related to the fish marshes, and in fields. Often cited reviews exposes them to lead (Anonymous 2006). being exposed to the lead material used in addressing the effects of ingested shot on The hazard that ingestion of lead pel- the fishing tackle, but rather due to the waterfowl include Bellrose (1959) and lets and bullets might pose to higher ver- extent of injury, blood loss, exposure to air, Sanderson and Bellrose (1986). Waterfowl tebrates is acknowledged, and in some and exhaustion during handling to remove may succumb after ingesting one or more instances already vulnerable populations the hook (Cooke et al. 2001). Studies that lead pellets, as their bodies waste away (e.g., California condor) may become fur- related lead exposure from ingested lead over a period of several weeks—losing ther at risk. sinkers and jigs or other tackle to the mor- from 30 to 50% of their normal weight. tality of fish were not found. Nevertheless, Less frequently, a large number of shot are Fishing Activities given that it is commonly accepted that ingested, resulting in an acute form of lead and Lead hooks and leaded jigs embedded in the poisoning, and the bird dies even though mouths of fish will work their way loose, it still has a normal weight. In addition, Lead in the form of fishing lures, sink- the effects of the lead from embedded fish- the risk of spent shot to other upland spe- ers, lead core , downrigger can- ing hooks and jigs would be minimal, in cies, including dove and quail, has long nonballs, and weights on a wide variety of comparison to the potential sub-lethal and been recognized (Kendall et al. 1996). fishing traps and nets can be introduced lethal injuries that may occur from swal- Raptors and other avian predators, as well into the aquatic environment when a lowed hooks. as scavengers, may be exposed to lead from commercial fisher or recreational angler Evidence was not found that inges- the consumption of shot pellets and bul- loses fishing gear due to accidental or tion of lead fishing tackle by amphibians let fragments embedded in tissues of dead intentional breakage. The amount of lead or reptiles is a widespread problem. There or wounded animals (Pattee and Pain fishing tackle lost in the aquatic environ- are published and unpublished accounts, 2003) or from tissues discarded in gut piles ment through recreational and commercial however, of turtles suffering from lead poi- (Fisher et al. 2006). For instance, vultures fishing activity is not accurately known. soning after ingesting lead fishing weights and condors appear highly susceptible to In studies based on angler interviews and (Borkowski 1997). toxicity from ingesting small quantities actual detection of lost tackle along shore- Concern about lead poisoning in birds of lead shot or bullets, as they are unable lines, the reported amount of lead fish- from anglers’ lead weights emerged as a to regurgitate pellets from their gastroin- ing tackle lost varies, depending on the significant issue during the 1970s as mute testinal tracts (Eisler 1988). The presence intensity of fishing pressure, the location swan (Cygnus olor) populations declined

230 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g in Britain (Sears 1988). This eventually nonballs. Based on the recovery of fish- ditions in these tissues do not dissolve lead resulted in the banning of most lead fish- ing weights associated with other fishing objects (De Francisco et al. 2003). There ing sinkers in the United Kingdom in 1986 tackle (i.e., swivels and hooks), some birds is the risk, however, of secondary poison- (Pattee and Pain 2003). In North America, such as the common loon may be ingest- ing by lead fishing weights for waterfowl the hazard of fishing sinkers and tackle to ing lead fishing weights as a byproduct of predators, but studies linking lead poison- common loons (Gavia immer) was sub- ingesting the bait attached to the fishing ing of predators due to ingestion of a lead sequently reported (Franson and Cliplef tackle (Franson and Cliplef 1992; Stone fishing weight lodged in their prey were 1992; Pokras and Chafel 1992; Stone and and Okoniewski 2001). Once ingested by not found in the literature. Okoniewski 2001). Necropsy of common a bird, the lead object, if retained within Ingestion of lead sinkers or the dust loons examined in New England found the gizzard, will be ground down and, com- associated with their manufacturing has that lead poisoning from ingested fishing bined with the effect of the acidic condi- been known to cause harm in humans. sinkers accounted for about one-half of tions in the digestive tract, result in the lead In sinker ingestion, the occurrence of the mortality in dead and moribund adults being released and absorbed into the bird’s lead toxicity depends on the amount of found during the breeding season (Pokras tissues (IPCS 1989; Scheuhammer and time that the object is retained within and Chafel 1992; Sidor et al. 2003). Birds Norris 1995; Nordic Council of Ministers the stomach (Fergusson et al. 1997). If most frequently ingest fishing tackle that 2003). It has been reported that lead fish- the lead object is retained in the stom- has been lost or abandoned by anglers ing sinkers and jigs have contributed to ach long enough for the object to be dis- along the banks or within water-bodies. lead poisoning mortalities in a number solved by the stomach acid, the lead will In their review, Scheuhammer and Norris of aquatic birds, particularly mute swans, be absorbed while it is in the small intes- (1995) stated that birds generally ingest whooper swans (Cygnus cygnus), Canada tine (Fergusson et al. 1997). Once the lead fishing weights that are less than 57 geese (Branta canadensis), mallards (Anas lead object is out of the stomach and in grams (2 ounces), although ingestion of platyrhynchos), brown pelicans (Pelecanus the small intestine it poses less of a poten- larger sinkers has been documented in the occidentalis), and common loons (Franson tial hazard for lead toxicity (Fergusson common loon (Franson et al. 2003). Thus, and Cliplef 1992; Pokras and Chafel 1992; et al. 1997). The U.S. Environmental the harm from fishing weights to water- Scheuhammer and Norris 1995; Stone and Protection Agency (USEPA 1994) esti- birds seems to primarily involve smaller Okoniewski 2001; Franson et al. 2003). mated that approximately 0.8 to 1.6 lead fishing weights used by recreational If the bird has the lead object embedded million people manufacture lead fishing anglers (Scheuhammer and Norris 1995) subcutaneously or intramuscularly, lead weights in their homes for either personal and not larger weights or downrigger can- poisoning should not occur as the pH con- use or for sale, representing approximately

Halltech Aquaatic Researach, Inc.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 231 30 to 35% of lead sinkers produced in the Preservation Act” that requires the use of less, instituted restrictions on the use or United States. Scheuhammer and Norris non-lead ammunition for hunting big game sale of certain lead sinkers and jig heads (1995) speculated that there is likely a and coyotes in the range of the California (Michael 2006). similar “cottage industry” in Canada. condor in central and southern California There are alternatives to lead bullets Thus, the cottage-industry of melting lead (Center for Biological Diversity 2007). (e.g., copper; Barnes 2008) and to lead and producing lead fishing tackle such as The hazard of ingested lead fishing shot available to hunters. Alternatives to lead sinkers and jigs is a potential source weights on aquatic and terrestrial fauna lead shot that have been approved for use of lead poisoning in humans through lead and humans has resulted in societal pres- in hunting waterfowl and coots and that inhalation (USEPA 2004). sure to place restrictions on the sale and are commercially available include shot Lead fishing tackle, especially the use of lead fishing weights. For instance, made from steel, bismuth-tin, tungsten- smaller fishing weights and jigs that can be some nations, including Denmark, bronze, tungsten-iron, tungsten-matrix, ingested, may be a source of lead poison- Canada, Great Britain, and the United tungsten-nickel-iron, tungsten-polymer, ing for some species of waterbirds and can States (partially summarized by Nordic tungsten-tin-bismuth, and tungsten-tin- exert sub-lethal and lethal effects in the Council of Ministers 2003), have begun iron-nickel. Substitutes for lead fishing individual. Although of concern where to apply restrictions on the sale and use tackle also have been available in retail waterbird populations are low or declin- of lead fishing sinkers and jigs. In Canada stores in Canada, the United States, ing, the ingestion of lead sinkers has not the use of lead sinkers or jigs weighing less and European countries for several years been demonstrated to have wide-spread than 50 grams (1.76 ounces) in national (Scheuhammer and Norris 1995; Nordic population-level effects. Nevertheless, parks and national wildlife areas is pro- Council of Ministers 2003). These the potential hazardous effect of lead include tungsten (both plastic composites hibited (Michael 2006). The use of lead on humans and aquatic ecosystem fauna and putty), stainless steel, carbon steel, tackle is also banned on some U.S. federal lends support to an ongoing, general tin, tin-bismuth, brass, ceramics, glass, lands that have loon and swan popula- effort to reduce lead introduced into the and pewter (Scheuhammer and Norris tions (Michael 2006). In 1999, the U.S. environment by human activities. 1995; Nordic Council of Ministers 2003; Fish and Wildlife Service announced its MOEA 2006). Sinkers made from alter- intent to establish additional lead-free Actions to Reduce native materials have been accepted to fishing areas by expanding the prohibi- Lead Exposure varying degrees, depending on their cost tion on certain fishing sinkers and jigs and how similar they are to lead tackle. The desire to limit lead exposure in to more refuges used by loons (USFWS Several of these alternatives such as humans has resulted in several interna- 1999); however, this has yet to be imple- ceramics and tin are not as dense as lead tional conventions and treaties, as well mented. Some states, consisting of and, hence, need to be larger to produce as national restrictions to minimize envi- Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, the same weight (see Figure 1). Many ronmental release of lead from Vermont, and New York have, nonethe- anglers believe this increase anthropogenic activities includ- in size is detrimental when ing use of leaded gasoline, lead Figure 1. Relative sizes of sinkers manufactured from different materials. inducing fish to bite. Other in paint, lead solder in tin cans Top row: 0.1 oz lead and tin split shot. alternatives such as brass and Middle row: 0.2 oz lead and tin split shot. for food storage, and lead shot- Bottom row: 0.8 oz lead, bismuth, and plastic-iron composite egg sinkers. steel, while somewhat larger gun pellets (Nordic Council of Sinkers courtesy of Water Gremlin. in size, have been advertised Ministers 2003). Scheuhammer as making more noise as they and Norris (1995) provide a bump over the bottom, which brief overview of restrictions is claimed to serve as an attrac- placed by nations that are spe- tant to fish. cific to the use of lead shot. It needs to be stated, however, These restrictions range from that a transition to alternative voluntary use of non-toxic materials for sinkers provides shot for all wetland bird hunt- significant challenges to the ing in the United Kingdom, tackle manufacturing industry to nationwide restrictions in terms of increased cost, avail- on hunting migratory water- ability of raw materials, and fowl species with lead shot in increased manufacturing costs, Canada and the United States, as well as the increased cost to to an outright ban on the use anglers. The high cost of alter- of lead shot for all hunting and native raw materials may make target shooting over water and T. L awrence, G L FC the transition to non-lead sink- agricultural lands in Denmark. ers more problematic now than A more recent example of several years ago. For example, this effort is the passing of tin is perhaps the most viable the 2007 California Assembly alternative for split shot sinkers Bill 821 “Ridley-Tree Condor and the manufacturing costs are

232 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g similar to lead. The December 2007 price are offering small-scale programs that of Fish and Wildlife Agencies’ Non- differential for the raw materials, however, exchange non-lead tackle for an angler’s toxic Ammunition Task Force and its Ad is approximately $7.42 per pound for tin lead tackle (MOEA 2006). Educational Hoc Mourning Dove and Lead Toxicosis versus $1.15 for lead (MetalPrices.com campaigns also introduce anglers to non- Working Group). 2007). As the specific gravity of tin is 7.2 lead substitutes and alert anglers to the Fishing tackle, especially weights that versus 11.3 for lead, more tin is required toxicity of lead in the aquatic environ- fall within the size usually ingested by to provide the same weight. Tin, there- ment, with the aim of increasing angler fauna (e.g., less than 2.5 cm, 0.98 inches) fore, is not only more costly, but also has use of non-toxic alternatives. and weighing less than 50 g (1.76 ounces; performance drawbacks. Bismuth and Scheuhammer and Norris 1995), can have tungsten currently cost $15/lb and $20/lb Summary lethal and sub-lethal effects on aquatic respectively. Moreover, tungsten is becom- fauna and on humans when ingested. ing essentially unavailable and has a high The effects of ingested lead shot and Downrigger weights (cannonballs), lead manufacturing cost. Brass may prove to be bullets used in hunting and shooting core fishing line, and the weights used a less desirable alternative, because brass sports activities are well documented. on a variety of commercial traps and contains approximately 9% lead, as well Principally, these include lead toxico- nets are much larger than fishing sinkers as some zinc which could be problematic. sis and mortality of waterfowl and their and smaller jigs that have been ingested Sintered steel, an alternative for non-split predators (Pattee and Pain 2003). These by fauna in aquatic ecosystem and by shot sinkers, has a specific gravity of less impacts have resulted in restrictions humans. Therefore, one would predict than 7 and it tends to rust in the tackle on the use of lead shot and bullets, and that the effect normally associated with box. Although a variety of alternatives subsequently regulations mandating the ingestion of lead fishing tackle is mini- to lead sinkers have been proposed and use of various non-toxic shot for species mal for downrigger cannonballs, lead investigated by the manufacturers of fish- with habitats that coincide with water- core fishing line, and the weights affixed ing tackle, it is not clear which alterna- fowl and condors. Studies assessing sub- to gear. Some studies tives will provide reasonable performance lethal and lethal effects from lead shot have examined the dissolution of lead at reasonable cost. ingestion among other wildlife, such as from fishing tackle, although these are As part of the effort to reduce the upland birds, are being conducted and few and not conclusive. More research use of lead in fishing activities, some discussions regarding the implications of needs to be conducted to determine the U.S. states, Environment Canada, and lead toxicosis are ongoing among manag- potential effect on fauna of the dissolu- some U.S. and Canadian organizations ers and policy makers (e.g. Association tion of all types of lead fishing tackle in

Floy Tag

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 233 low and high deposition densities and could be made available for production In conclusion, AFS interacts with varying water chemistry conditions. and distribution by all management many natural resource management agencies, fishing tackle manufacturers, agencies, angling organizations, and the Recommendations and retailers. fishing tackle industry. AFS, therefore, is in a position to both foster education 3. AFS could partner with and encour- As stewards of North America’s on the hazards of lead to wildlife and to age fisheries management agencies to aquatic ecosystems, fisheries manage- develop a position statement with the develop lead tackle exchange programs ment agencies, anglers, angling clubs, aim of reducing to an absolute minimum and, in conjunction with this tackle and commercial fishers, as well as manu- the introduction of lead into the aquatic exchange effort, participate in safe col- facturers and retailers of fishing tackle, environment from fishing activities. lection and disposal programs for lead work actively and often collectively for the protection and conservation of North fishing tackle. References America’s aquatic ecosystems. A tenet 4. AFS could work closely with the of this stewardship is minimizing the Association of Fish and Wildlife Anonymous. 2006. Recommendations for introduction of toxic materials, such as Agencies (AFWA), fishing tackle man- reducing exposure. MidwayUSA Master lead, to levels that have been shown to ufacturers, the American Sportfishing Catalogue, page 175. Columbia, Missouri. be non-hazardous, while recognizing that Association (ASA), and the Canadian Available at: www.midwayusa.com/ complete elimination may be neither fea- Sportfishing Industry Association static.exe/getstaticpage?page=lead_war- sible nor necessary. Detrimental effects at (CSIA) to encourage and facilitate a ning.htm (December 2006). the population level of bird species that transition from the manufacture, dis- Barnes Bullets. 2008. Barnes Bullets—the future in bullet technology! Barnes ingest lead sinkers have not been docu- tribution, and sale of small lead fish- Bullets, American Fork, Utah. Available mented in North America, but impacts at ing weights to fishing weights made of at www.barnesbullets.com/ (March the population level should not be a pre- non-toxic alternative materials. The 2008). requisite for corrective action. Current development of schedules would facili- knowledge indicates that small lead (and Bellrose, F. C. 1959. Lead poisoning as a tate this transition. It is recognized mortality factor in waterfowl popula- other toxic) sinkers (< 2.5 cm), in par- that a number of the recreational and tions. Illinois Natural History Survey ticular, are most likely to be ingested commercial fishing tackle manufactur- Bulletin 27:235-288. by waterbirds. Several options exist for ers have already taken the initiative by Borkowski, R. 1997. Lead poisoning and the American Fisheries Society (AFS), entering into the lead-free tackle mar- internal perforations in a snapping turtle perhaps through a small task group, to ket, and are well into this transition; (Chelydra serpentina) due to fishing gear develop a position statement (white however, the shelf space and volume ingestion. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife paper) based on the scientific data on the of alternate material weights remains a Medicine 28(1):109-113. hazard and risk of lead from lost commer- small percentage of the overall inven- Braun, J. M., R. S. Kahn, T. Froelich, cial and tackle. tory and sale of these small fishing P. Auinger, and B. Lamphear. 2006. 1. The AFS could work with the pro- weights Exposures to environmental toxicants and attention deficit hyperactivity dis- vincial, state, and federal fisheries 5. Consistent with the above negotiated order in U.S. children. Environmental management agencies, in addition to transition schedule for the manufacture the angling clubs, tackle manufactur- Health Perspectives 114(12):1904-1909. and sale of alternatives to lead, the AFS ers, and tackle retailers to educate Available at: www.ehponline.org/mem- could work with the AFWA, ASA, and anglers and commercial fishers about bers/2006/9478/9478.pdf. (July 2007). CSIA to develop a framework for future the availability and utility of non-toxic Camus, A. C., M. M. Mitchell, J. F. phased-in regulations on the sale, use, alternatives to lead weights and the Williams, and P. L. H. Jowett. 1998. and possession of lead fishing sinkers environmental benefits of using these Elevated lead levels in farmed American while fishing. This framework would alternatives. AFS could also work with alligators Alligator mississippiensis con- provide for requisite consistency in the U.S. National Institute of Health suming Myocastor coypus meat contami- nated by lead bullets. Journal of World and Health Canada to educate anglers the rules, regulations, and their imple- Aquaculture Society 29:370-376. about the potential health hazards of mentation; would help deliver a strong Center for Biological Diversity. 2007. casting and manufacturing their own message to anglers; and would allow Schwarzenegger approves his- lead sinkers and jigs. manufacturers to more easily develop and market non-lead products. toric condor protection bill. Center 2. The AFS Fisheries Management and for Biological Diversity, Tucson, 6. The AFS may consider local bans on Fisheries Administration Sections Arizona. Available at: www.bio- could collaborate to develop a spe- the use of lead fishing sinkers as an logicaldiversity.org/swcbd/press/ cific Aquatic Resources Conservation appropriate management tactic in geo- condor-lead-10-13-2007.html Electronic Library (ARCeL) module graphical areas of high annual mortal- (November 2007). for use as part of a lead-free education/ ity of waterbirds associated with lead Church, M. E., R. Gwiazda, R. W. outreach project, perhaps funded by the poisoning and in heavily protected Risebrough, K. Sorenson, C. P. Fisheries Conservation Foundation. All pristine areas such as national parks Chamberlain, S. Farry, W. Heinrich, of the requisite educational materials and national wildlife refuges. B. A. Rideout, and D. R. Smith. 2006.

234 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Ammunition is the principal source of lead accumulated by California condors re-introduced to the wild. Environmental Science and Technology 40:6143-6150. Coa, X., L. Q. Ma, M. Chen, D. W. Hardison Jr., and W. G. Harris. 2003. Weathering of lead bullets and their environmen- DIDSON tal effects at outdoor shooting ranges. Journal of Environmental Quality 32:526-534. Cooke, S. J., D. P. Philipp, K. M. Dunmall, and J. F. Schreer. datum 2001. The influence of terminal tackle on injury, handling time, and cardiac disturbance of rock bass. North American Journal Monitoring Behavior of Fisheries Management 21:333-342. DIDSON acoustic cameras can observe CPSB (Consumer Product Safety Bureau). 2002. Lead risk fish behavior without being intrusive. reduction strategy, draft. Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. Available at: Much can be learned in the process. www.hc-sc.gc.ca/cps-spc/pubs/cons/lead-plomb/index_e.htm. (February 2007). De Francisco, N., J. D. Ruiz Troya, and E. I. Agüera. 2003. Lead and lead toxicity in domestic and free living birds. Avian Pathology 32:3-13. Duerr, A. E. 1999. Abundance of lost and discarded fishing tackle and implications for waterbird populations in the United States. Master’s thesis. School of Renewable Natural Resources, University of Arizona, Tucson. Record salmon digging redds both day and night. Durback, L. F., G. P. Wedin, and D. E. Seidler. 1989. Management of lead foreign body ingestion. Clinical Toxicology 27(3):173-182 Eisler, R. 1988. Lead hazards to fish, wildlife, and invertebrates: a synoptic review. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. Contaminant Hazard Reviews Report 14, Biological Report 85(1.14). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Laurel, Maryland. Fergusson, J., G. Malecky, and E. Simpson. 1997. Lead foreign body ingestion in children. Journal of Paediatrics and Child An orderly normal spawn (left) and a raucous Health 33:542-544. group spawn (right) are clearly visible. Fisher, I. J., D. J. Pain, and V. G. Thomas. 2006. A review of lead poisoning from ammunition sources in terrestrial birds. Biological Conservation 131:421-432. Franson, J. C., and D. J. Cliplef. 1992. Causes of mortality in common loons. Pages 2-59 in L. Morse, S. Stockwell, and M. Pokras, eds. Proceedings from the 1992 Conference on the Loon and its Ecosystem: Status, Management, and Environmental Concerns, 22-24 August 1992, College of the Atlantic, Bar Harbor, Maine. Franson, J. C., S. P. Hansen, T. E. Creekmore, C. J. Brand, D. The competition gets pretty heated... C. Evers, A. E. Duerr, and S. DeStefano. 2003. Lead fish- hot enough to cause one male to bite another. ing weights and other fishing tackle in selected waterbirds. Waterbirds 26:345-352. Watch all the action unfold on our website! Gustavsson, P., and L. Gerhardsson. 2005. Intoxication from accidentally ingested lead shot retained in the gastrointestinal www.soundmetrics.com tract. Environmental Health Perspectives 113:491-493. DIDSON helps count abundance and determine Hammerton, K. M., N. Jayasinghe, R. A. Jeffree, and R. P. Lim. behavior of fish where other acoustic equipment 2003. Experimental study of blood lead kinetics in estuarine has been ineffective. Some call it an Acoustic crocodiles (Crocodylus porosus) exposed to ingested lead shot. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Movie Camera. Visit our website for a large 45:390-398. collection of sonar films and information. Henny, C. J. 2003. Effects of mining lead on birds: a case history For demonstrations and sales information at Coeur d’Alene Basin, Idaho. Pages 755-766 in D. J. Hoffman, see www.oceanmarineinc.com B. A. Rattner, G. A. Burton, and J. Cairns Jr., eds. Handbook of Ocean Marine, Inc. ecotoxicology, 2nd edition. Lewis Publishing Inc., Boca Raton, 757.382.7616 [email protected] Florida.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 235 Henny, C. J., L. J. Blus, D. J. Hoffman, papers/lead_fishing_gear/fpt_06-13.pdf Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc., and R. A. Grove. 1994. Lead in hawks, (July 2007). Newtown, Connecticut. falcons, and owls downstream from a MOEA (Minnesota Office of Sanderson, G. C., and F. C. Bellrose. mining site on the Coeur d’Alene River, Environmental Assistance). 2006. Let’s 1986. A review of the problem of lead Idaho. Environmental Monitoring and get the lead out! Non-lead alternatives poisoning in waterfowl. Illinois Natural Assessment 29:267-288. for fishing tackle. Minnesota Pollution History Survey Special Publication 4. Hernberg, S. 2000. Lead poisoning in a Control Agency, St. Paul. Available at: Scheuhammer, A. M., and S. L. Norris. historical perspective. American Journal www.pca.state.mn.us/oea/reduce/sink- 1995. A review of the environmental of Industrial Medicine 38:244-254. ers.cfm (December 2006). impacts of lead shotshells ammunition Hui, C. A. 2002. Lead distribution Needleman, H. L. 2004. Lead poison- throughout soil, flora and an inverte- ing. Annual Review of Medicine and lead fishing weights in Canada. brate at a wetland skeet range. Journal of 55:209-222. Canadian Wildlife Service Occasional Toxicology and Environmental Health Nordic Council of Ministers. 2003. Lead Paper 88, Environment Canada, Ottawa, 65:1093-1107. review. Nordic Council of Ministers Ontario. IPCS (International Programme on Report 1, Issue 4. Nordic Council of Sears, J. 1988. Regional and seasonal varia- Chemical Safety). 1989. Lead environ- Ministers, Copenhaven, Denmark. tions in lead poisoning in mute swan mental aspects. Environmental Health Available at: www.norden.org/pub/miljo/ Cygnus olor in relation to the distribution Criteria 85. World Health Organization, miljo/sk/US20031308.pdf (December of lead and lead weights in the Thames International Programme on Chemical 2006). area, England. Biological Conservation Safety (IPCS), Geneva, Switzerland. Pain, D. 1992. Lead poisoning in water- 46:115-134. Jacks, G., and M. Bystrom. 1995. fowl. Proceedings of the International Sidor, I. F., M. A. Pokras, A. R. Major, Dissolution of lead weights lost when Waterfowl and Wetlands Research R. H. Poppenga, K. M. Taylor, and R. fishing. Division of Land and Water Bureau, Slimbridge, Gloucester, U.K. M. Miconi. 2003. Mortality of common Resources, Royal Institute of Technology, Pattee, O. H., P. H. Bloom, J. M. Scott, Stockholm. and M. R. Smith. 1990. Lead hazards loons in New England, 1987 to 2000. Kendall, R. J., T. E. Lacher Jr., C. Bunck, within the range of the California con- Journal of Wildlife Diseases 39:306-315. F. B. Daniel, C. Driver, C. E. Grue, F. dor. Condor 92:931-937. Stone, W. B., and J. C. Okoniewski. 2001. Leighton, W. Stansley, P. G. Watanabe, Pattee, O. H., and D. J. Pain. 2003. Lead Necropsy findings and environmental and M. Whitworth. 1996. An ecologi- in the environment. Pages 373-408 in D. contaminants in common loons from cal risk assessment of lead shot exposure J. Hoffman, B. A. Rattner, G. A. Burton, New York. Journal of Wildlife Diseases in non-waterfowl avian species: upland and J. Cairns Jr., eds. 2008. Handbook 37(1):178-184. game birds and raptors. Environmental of ecotoxicology, 2nd edition. Lewis USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Toxicology and Chemistry 15:4-20. Publishing Inc., Boca Raton, Florida. Agency). 1994. Lead fishing sink- Khan, A. N. 2005. Lead poisoning. eMedi- Pokras, M. A. and R. Chafel. 1992. Lead ers; response to citizens’ petition and cine instant access to the minds of medi- toxicosis from ingested fishing sinkers proposed ban; proposed rule. Federal cine. Available at: www.emedicine.com/ in adult common loons (Gavia immer) Register Part III, Volume 40, Part radio/topic386.htm (October 2005). in New England. Journal of Zoo and 745:11121– 11143. Lance, V. A., T. R. Horn, R. M. Elsey, Wildlife Medicine 23:92-97. . 2001. Best management practices and A. dePeyster. 2006. Chronic Radomski, P., T. Heinrich, T. S. Jones, P. incidental lead ingestion in a group Rivers, and P. Talmage. 2006. Estimates for lead at outdoor shooting ranges, of captive-reared alligators (Alligator of tackle loss for five Minnesota walleye EPA-902-B-01-001. USEPA, Division mississipiensis): possible contribution fisheries. North American Journal of of Enforcement and Compliance to reproductive failure. Comparative Fisheries Management 26:206-212. Assistance, RCRA Compliance Branch, Biochemical Physiology C 142:30-35. Rattner, B. A., J. C. Franson, S. R. New York. Available at: www.epa.gov/ Meretsky V. J., N. F. Synder, S. R. Sheffield, C. I. Goddard, N. J. region02/waste/leadshot/epa_bmp.pdf Beissinger, D. A. Clendenen, and J. Leonard, D. Stang, and P. J. Wingate. (March 2007). W. Wiley. 2000. Demography of the 2008. Sources and implications of . 2004. Humans and lead fishing sinkers. California condor: implications for rees- lead ammunition and fishing tackle on USEPA Office of Water, Washington, tablishment. Conservation Biology 14: natural resources. The Wildlife Society DC. Available at: www.epa.gov/owow- 957-967. Technical Review, in press. wtr1/fish/humans.html (September MetalPrices.com. 2007. Metal prices and Rooney, C. P., R. G. McLaren, and R. J. 2005). news on the Internet. Basalt, Colorado. Cresswell. 1999. Distribution and phy- USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). Available at: www.metalprices.com/ toavailability of lead in a soil contami- (December 2007). nated with lead shot. Water, Air, and 1999. Establishing “lead free fishing Michael, P. 2006. Fish and wildlife issues Soil Pollution 116:535-548. areas” and the prohibition of the use of related to the use of lead fishing gear. SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition certain fishing sinkers and jigs made with Washington Department of Fish and Manufacturers’ Institute, Inc.). 1996. lead on specific units of the National Wildlife Fish Program, FPT 06-13. Lead mobility at shooting ranges. Wildlife Refuge system. 50 CFR Part 32, Available at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/fish/ Catalog Number FD-1/708. National Federal Register 64:17992.

236 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g AFS symposium on climate change, continue at this year’s annual meeting in Ottawa with “Sensitivity of Fish and Fisheries to Climate Change—Response and Adaptation” and “Effects of Climate-Related Drying and Surface Water Loss on Aquatic Ecosystems in Extreme Environments.”

Column: Gus Rassam AFS Executive Director Director's Line Rassam can be contacted at [email protected].

Climate, Fisheries and Wildlife

The North American Wildlife and to do about climate change and in organizing a major symposium on Natural Resources Conference in the pace of action required to slow "Fisheries in a Changing Climate." The Phoenix this year devoted a special down the trend, if not reverse it. proceedings of that symposium (http:// workshop to the topic of climate The day-long workshop at the afsbooks.org/x54032xm.html) remain change and wildlife. Many papers at North American included many excel- as an important record of what we the meetings of both the Northeastern lent presentations from scientists and know and what we don’t know about and the Western Divisions of AFS also managers working on the fish and this overarching new paradigm for addressed various aspects of the effects wildlife resources of this country. The biology. Recent AFS Annual Meetings of major changes in the climate on discussion that took place afterwards have continued to feature symposia on fisheries resources. The U.S. Geological highlighted the state of knowledge, climate change, and this year’s meet- Survey’s Biological Resources Discipline or lack of it, relative to fish and wild- ing in Ottawa is no exception. The has been funded by Congress to begin life management in a warming globe. planned symposia “Sensitivity of Fish working on a National Global Warming The concern was there and, more and Fisheries to Climate Change— and Wildlife Science Center. A work- importantly, the commitment was Response and Adaptation” and “Effects shop is planned to jumpstart that effort. there to learn more about the com- of Climate-Related Drying and Surface What with Al Gore, the polar bear, plex ways that species react to ris- Water Loss on Aquatic Ecosystems in and YouTube, climate change is now ing temperatures and sea levels, and Extreme Environments” hopefully will part of the general discourse in the adapt to their new environment. shed further light on these critical topics. United States among scientists cer- Mitigating the tainly, but also in broad segments of adverse effects of the popular culture. Some candidates global warming is a for political office in fact are using it huge task that will to define their candidacy in a broader require a lot more sense than the usual concentration on cooperation among the economy and security. It is no lon- the different enti- ger an esoteric topic that the elites use ties (local, federal, to show that they know things better. international) that A recent survey of anglers and have jurisdictional hunters commissioned by the National oversight over Wildlife Federation revealed that public lands and climate change and global warm- waters. It will ing are already on the minds of require increased outdoors enthusiasts of all political public awareness, persuasions. To highlight some of understanding, the data from that survey: more than and participation. 60% believe that global warming is AFS, in its already happening, more than 70% traditional role of agree that the United States should provider of science- be a world leader in addressing that validated informa- issue, and a large majority believe tion and as a forum that we should immediately invest for informed dialog, in renewable energy technologies. will act in concert In fact, a general consensus is with many other developing that: (a) significant warm- players to help in ing is taking place and (b) a sig- this process. In nificant contribution to that trend 2001, AFS took the O.S. Systems is due to human activity. What is lead (in cooperation still contentious and unclear is what with Sea Grant)

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 237 News: AFS Units

Tom Gengerke, left, celebrates his final day on Dakota Chapter President Todd St. Sauver, left, Steve Chipps, left, congratulates his student, the job with the Iowa Department of Natural bestows the Distinguished Professional Service Steve Ranney, winner of the Best Student Resources with Jim Riis at the joint Iowa and Award to Ron Koth. Paper Award. Dakota Chapter meeting.

Dakota Chapter Steve Ranney, a student in the helped with his poster, “Distribution Holds joint meeting Department of Wildlife and Fisheries and habitat use by juvenile pal- with Iowa Chapter at South Dakota State University, lid sturgeon in the Fort Randall The Dakota and Iowa Chapters won the Best Student Paper award. reach of the Missouri River,” by met jointly on 19–21 February. Over His award-winning presentation was Steve Chipps and Rob Klumb. 150 participants mingled at the titled the “The influence of feeding Ryan Schmaltz from South Dakota socials, attended the plenary and level on the metabolic rate of lar- State University was the win- concurrent sessions, participated gemouth bass: evidence of a com- ner of the Schmulbach Memorial in their respective Chapter’s busi- pensatory response.” Steve Chipps Scholarship. Named after James C. ness meetings, and recognized their guided Casey on his research project. Schmulbach, this competitive scholar- respective award recipients. Student Brian Spindler, another South ship is awarded by the Chapter to recognition dominated the awards Dakota State student, won the an eligible junior or senior under- given by the Dakota Chapter. Best Student Poster award. He was graduate studying fisheries in either

Ryan Schmaltz, left, receives the Schmulbach South Dakota State University students Mark Wayne Nelson-Stastny, left, congratulates Kris Memorial Scholarship from Dakota Chapter Fincel, left, and Bethany Galster gleefully Edwards on winning the fictitious “I’m So Glad President Todd St. Sauver. transact business during the student raffle. You Are Doing the Night-Sampling” award.

238 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Sauger Scholarship winners display their awards. Pictured are Bethany Galster, Jonah Dagel, Jeff Grote, Nathan Kuntz, and Subunit President Andy Jansen. Incoming Vice President Scott Gangl Incoming Secretary Treasurer Russell Kinzler All are at South Dakota State University.

North or South Dakota. Sauger long-time Dakota Chapter member given to the Barnes County (North scholarships (travel awards) went to Al Kriel and funded by his family, Dakota) Water Conservation District. South Dakota State University stu- the award pays for full membership New Chapter officers were dents Bethany Gulster, Jeff Grote, elected at the meeting. Russell in the American Fisheries Society. Jonah Dagel, and Nathan Kuntz. Kinzler (secretary-treasurer), Scott Ron Koth and Mark Drobisch Jonathan Tofteland from Valley City Gangl (vice president), and Mike University and Jeff Grote from South received Distinguished Professional Barnes (president elect), join incom- Dakota State University received Service awards, and the Aquatic ing president Randy Hiltner. Kriel scholarships. Named after Resource Conservation Award was —Mike Barnes

Customize it.

Forestry Suppliers carries a complete selection of quality products from WILDLIFE CONTROL PRODUCTS Whether you need to measure dissolved oxygen, pH, ORP, ammonium, chloride, or nitrate, the YSI Professional Plus is all you need. Just select the necessary cables and probes and get started! WATER QUALITY INSTRUMENTS Forestry Suppliers features more than 9,000 top-quality products geared especially to outdoor pros; each backed ALL WEATHER FIELD BOOKS with the best tech support and customer service, and our 100% Satisfaction Guarantee! Give us a call or log on to www.forestry-suppliers.com to get a free copy of our latest catalog today! ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING EQUIPMENT

RAIN GEAR AND WADERS

GPS RECEIVERS www.forestry-suppliers.com MEASURING AND WEIGHING PRODUCTS Forestry Suppliers, Inc. Catalog Request: 800-360-7788 • Sales: 800-647-5368 ©2008 Forestry Suppliers, Inc. All rights reserved.

FisheriesFISHERIES_030308.indd • v o l 33 n o 1 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 3/3/08 12:45:21239 PM Tennessee Chapter Recognizes several members with awards The Tennessee Chapter of AFS recognized several members at Fall Creek Falls State Park in March 2008. Chip Walton, Tennessee Technological University, presented the Best Student Paper. Ed Scott, a recent retiree from the Tennessee Valley Authority and life-long champion of snail darters, received a Lifetime Achievement Award. John Riddle and Danny Scott of the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency were also awarded Lifetime Achievement Awards for decades of

Frank Fiss presents the Friends of Fisheries Award to the Water Management Section of the Nashville District Corps of Engineers. Bob Sneed and Richard Tippit accepted the award for their section.

service to fisheries in Tennessee. TheW ater Management Section of the Nashville District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was awarded the Friends of Fisheries Award for their adaptive management of water and communi- cation efforts during the exceptional drought of 2007. —Frank Fiss

Emperor Dquatics, Inc.

Frank Fiss presents the Best Student Paper Award to Chip Walton.

240 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g AFS constitution and rules: Proposed Amendments

The following AFS Constitution and vice-president, and a secretary-treasurer by providing this explanation in Rules Amendments were approved or secretary and treasurer, whose duties Fisheries and on the website, active for publication in Fisheries by the must be defined in the unit's bylaws. members may be better prepared to Governing Board on 8 March 2008. In the case of a Student Subunit vote at the Society Business Meeting They will be voted on by the member- that has joint affiliation with the in Ottawa on 19 August 2008. ship at the AFS Business Meeting in Society and at least one other Ottawa on Tuesday, 18 August 2008. professional society, either the Recommended Amendments: President or Vice President must be Joint Student Subunits an Active Member of the Society. RULE 2. Resolutions Resolutions shall be introduced at an The Governing Board recom- RULES mends revision of Article V.3 in the [No changes needed.] annual or special Society business meet- AFS Constitution as follows: ing by the Chair of the Resolutions PROCEDURES Committee or a designated represen- Background: Discussions with The [Not required to be published but avail- tative. General resolutions of broad Wildlife Society and other resource- able for review at www.fisheries.org/ national or international interest to be related societies indicate that a few stu- test/aboutus/proposedconstitution.pdf] considered by the Society, including dent subunits are experiencing difficult any that units may have approved and redundancies in joint affiliation with Resolution Approval Process wish to nominate for Society action, AFS. These subunits request that the must be submitted in writing to the Governing Board recommend approval At the request of the Resolutions Resolutions Committee Chair at least of the following amendment to the Committee, the Governing Board AFS Constitution and adopt changes 30 60 days before the annual meet- recommends amending Rule 2 ing. Internal resolutions that concern to the Procedures to avoid unnecessary in the AFS Rules as follows: duplication of officers while retain- the Society may be submitted to the Chair at any time and need not ing effective connections to AFS. Background: Updates several be approved by the Governing aspects of the resolution approval Process: This proposed constitutional process and requires at least 60 days Board prior to presentation to the amendment must be published in advanced notice to the commit- membership. All resolutions must Fisheries and posted to the AFS website tee chair for external resolutions. be determined to be relevant and for Society review at least 30 days appropriate by the Governing Board in ahead of a vote by Active Members Process: An amendment to the AFS accordance with Article IX, 17 of the at the Society Business Meeting in Rules does not have to be published in Constitution before presentation to the Ottawa on 19 August 2008. Associated advance for member review. However, membership for review or a vote. revisions to the Procedures were adopted by a simple majority vote of the Governing Board on 8 March 2008, pending changes to the Constitution.

Recommended Amendments:

AFS CONSTITUTION Article V.3. Units of the Society Only Active Members of the Society may hold a unit office, chair a unit com- mittee, or vote on unit affairs. Among Sonotronics its elected officers, a unit must have at least a president, a president-elect or

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 241 Editorial: Steven J. Cooke Cooke is the chair of the AFS fisheries forum Publications Overview Committee and is also an assistant professor of environmental science and biology at Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada. He can be contacted at [email protected]. Truth, Faith, and Transparency in Peer Review— Perspectives on the AFS Peer Review Process

A recent editorial (see Amos 2008; of the submission. A minimum of two manuscripts of low suitability (AFS does Fisheries 33:197-198) drew attention reviews is required, but it is not uncom- this) and to use a three-of-three or to the apparent increased publication mon to receive comments from four ref- four-of-four decision rule when making of “faith-based science” (Hilborn 2007) erees. Not all reviewers will be experts decisions. As noted above, although through a series of personal anecdotes. in all aspects of a paper. Indeed, AFS AFS rarely uses four “referees,” at least The author summarized his concerns strives for a mix of referees that cover four individuals (editors and review- about a paper that appeared recently relevant disciplines, institutional per- ers) review each AFS paper before they in the journal Science as well as his spectives (e.g., academic, government), appear in print. Amos suggested that service as a referee for AFS. Beyond and regions (local knowledge versus a he was “outvoted,” although rarely simply identifying problems, he went global perspective). AFS also seeks a mix is the process that pragmatic. The AE further and proposed several revi- of seniority and expertise and routinely and editor take into account all com- sions to the AFS peer review model. involves advanced graduate students ments and weigh them based on their Here, I address the ideas proposed by in the peer review process (usually own expertise to determine the fate of Amos wearing my hat as chair of the identified because of their repeated submitted papers. Unlike at AFS, many AFS Publications Overview Committee submissions to AFS journals; see Jolley journals do not share the final deci- (POC) and as a fellow AFS member and Graeb 2007 for a summary of the sion and associated correspondence and scientist interested in ensuring many benefits of involving graduate with referees. Personally, I value this that AFS journals maintain the high- students in the peer review process). service—it helps me to understand the est reasonable standards and remain a After the reviews have been received, basis for a decision and to see other credible outlet for fisheries research. the AE collates and evaluates these perspectives on the same paper— There are many different models comments and conducts their own and it is one of the reasons why I am for peer review and these vary exten- assessment. They then pass along their usually keen to review AFS papers. sively among “fishy” journals. The recommendation to the editor. The edi- The AFS POC provides direction to current model used in the AFS family tor also evaluates all of the material and AFS regarding our journals such that of journals involves an editorial hier- forwards their decision to the author. they best serve our members and the archy. Each paper is initially assigned At a minimum, each paper is reviewed broader scientific community. In doing by AFS publications staff to one of by the editor, AE, and two referees. so, we conduct and interpret surveys, the journal co-editors (equivalent to Although I am hesitant to revert to evaluate practices of other journals, an “editor-in-chief”) and an associate personal anecdotes, I can think of many respond to timely issues (such as this), editor (AE). The editor is selected on cases where my opinion diverged from and try to understand what can be the basis of subject expertise while the those of the other referees—sometimes done to enhance the delivery and qual- AE is selected on the basis of exper- with me being more critical and some- ity of AFS publications. Several recent tise and workload (how many articles times being less critical. This is why it initiatives are worthy of sharing. The they are currently handling). The AE is important that we involve multiple POC is active in evaluating emerging evaluates the work to ensure that it referees with diverse expertise. Several trends with respect to peer review. is worthy of review. For each journal, recent scientific studies have evaluated For example, in the last year we have there are approximately 10 to 20 AEs the role of different review procedures discussed changes to the peer review with a broad range of expertise in in preserving rigor in the peer review process that would involve a double- relevant topical areas. New AEs are process. One of the most relevant blind format (neither the authors nor recruited when warranted by increased was published in BioScience and was the reviewers are identified during the levels of submission in a topical area authored by two active AFS members review process). Indeed, this approach or by the “retirement” of another (Brian Neff and Julian Olden; Neff and has been shown to increase the diversity AE. The AE is generally an expert in Olden 2006). Their analysis revealed of contributions (in terms of gender) some aspect of a submitted paper. that the most reliable approach to that successfully make it through the The AEs identify a number of pos- ensure the integrity of scientific publica- peer review process in a leading ecol- sible reviewers and attempt to encour- tions in journals was to use an editor or ogy journal (i.e., Behavioral Ecology; age them to provide a critical appraisal editorial board to prescreen and remove Budden et al. 2008). We have also

242 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Editorial: fisheries forum

considered completely open reviews (reviewers, editors, and science and policy. At present, there are exceedingly few authors all disclosed). To date, we have not recommended “comments” in AFS journals (perhaps one or two a year). any changes to the existing family of AFS journals and will For the new journal, we have opted to include a dynamic continue to monitor and debate trends related to the peer section called the “Forum,” which will have its own special review process and other relevant publication issues. editor (James Cowan). This section will serve as a vehicle We also have a unique opportunity to evaluate alternative for enabling and stimulating open and insightful debate review models as we launch our new online, open-access regarding material published in the new journal and other journal titled Marine and Coastal Fisheries (see Fabrizio 2008). This is the first new journal for AFS since 1989, when outlets. Indeed, such a venue would be perfect for Amos the Journal of Aquatic Animal Health was launched. Beyond and others to discuss and debate the recent string of papers providing authors with an appropriate venue for papers on sea lice in a structured, moderated, and timely manner. on this topic, the journal also serves as a means of trying In the coming years we will monitor and evaluate what new approaches to peer review. We are interested in try- works and, where appropriate, consider extending these ing to be more responsive (rapid) with the review process changes to other AFS journals. We appreciate Amos (2008) while maintaining the high quality that we have come to drawing the attention of these issues to the AFS community. expect from AFS journals, so we have adopted a different Rest assured that the AFS POC, journal editors, staff, and the peer review model for this journal. Instead of AEs, we have AFS Governing Board are all committed to disseminating the selected a diverse group of exceptional scientists that will be best science in a manner that is accessible to the fisheries termed “subject editors.” These individuals (approximately community and other stakeholders. In closing, I also want 20 to start) will personally select referees and will make to remind the AFS community that all of our editors, associ- final decisions on manuscript submission independent of the editor-in-chief (Donald Noakes). The editor in chief will ate editors, referees (probably including you!), and members provide input or address conflict when necessary but his of the POC are volunteers and we owe all of them a great real focus will be on refinement of editorial policy, recruit- deal of gratitude for their service to the fisheries profession. ing subject editors, encouraging high quality submissions, We welcome comments on the AFS peer review policies and in making strategic decisions regarding topical areas and are open to considering other models for peer review. that should be pursued by the journal. Authors will have I’m not sure that this will yield the “truth” sought by Kevin the opportunity to identify the subject editor that they feel Amos, but we do hope that it will help to increase his “faith” is most appropriate for their paper. The subject editor will (play on Hilborn 2006) in the AFS peer review system. have their name associated with a given paper, where it will state at the end that they had the editorial responsibil- References ity for the paper. This transparency is new to AFS journals, yet is common in other outlets such as Diseases of Aquatic Amos, K. 2008. Transparency and the peer- Organisms, Marine Ecology Progress Series, Endangered review process. Fisheries 33:197-198. Species Research, and Ecology Letters. We did discuss Budden, A. E., T. Tregenza, L. W. Aarssen, J. Koricheva, including an open referee approach as well (where referee R. Leimu, and C. J. Lortie. 2008. Double-blind identities are revealed to the authors). However, we have serious concerns regarding our ability to be able to attract review favours increased representation of female referees in the face of a general trend toward diminish- authors. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 23:4-6. ing time and increasing referee declines to review papers. Fabrizio, M. C. 2008. A new AFS open-access We will continue to monitor developments in peer review journal to explore and advance marine and in relevant journals and revisit this topic in the future. coastal fisheries science. Fisheries 33:4. The other comment suggested by Amos was a mechanism Hilborn, R. 2006. Faith-based fisheries. Fisheries 31:554-555 by which referees (or others) could provide comment on a Jolley, J. C., and B. D. S. Graeb. 2007. Writing, publishing, paper which would accompany the paper in its published and reviewing: the students’ perspective. Fisheries 32:40-43. form. The idea of generating rationale debate and discus- Neff, B. D., and J. D. Olden. 2006. Is peer review sion associated with research output is critical for advancing a game of chance? BioScience 56:333-340.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 243 To submit upcoming events for Calendar: inclusion on the AFS Web site Calendar, Fisheries Events send event name, dates, city, state/ province, web address, and contact information to [email protected]. (If space is available, events will also be printed in Fisheries magazine.) To see more event listings go to www.fisheries.org.

Date eVent Name City, State For More Information

Jun 2-13 Diseases of Warmwater Fish, Ruskin and St. Augustine, Florida http://conference.ifas.ufl.edu/ame/wwf/index.html

Jun 3-4 53rd Annual Meeting of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Cleveland, Ohio www.glf.org, 734/622-3209 x28

Jun 18-20 channel Migratiion Zone Delineation Workshop, Zillah, Washington www.nwetc.org/hyd-404_06-08

Jun 28-30 shanghai International Fisheries and Expo Shanghai, P. R. China www.gehuaexpo.com

Jul 7-11 11th International Coral Reef Symposium Fort Lauderdale, Florida www.nova.edu/ncri/11icrs

Jul 9-12 Annual Meeting AFS Fish Health Section Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Canada www.kupei.ca/FHS-AFS2008

Jul 13-17 conference for Society for Conservation Chattanooga, Tennessee www.utc.edu/Academic/ConferenceforSocietyofConservationBiologists

Jul 14-18 hydroVision 2008 Sacramento, California www.hcipub.com/hydrovision/abstracts.asp, [email protected]

Jul 20-25 eighth International Wetland Conference, Cuiaba, Brazil, www.cppantanal.org.br/intecol

Jul 21-25 Fisheries Society of the British Isles Annual International Symposium Cardiff, United Kingdom www.Fsbi.org.uk/2008

Jul 22-25 Asian Wetland Symposium 2008 Hanoi, Viet Nam www.aws2008.net

Jul 23-28 American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists Conference Montreal, Canada www.asih.org/annualmeetings

Jul 25-27 seventh International Conference on Recirculating Aquaculture Roanoke, Virginia www.cpe.vt.edu/aquaculture/ Terry Rakestraw, [email protected]/aquaculture/, 540/231-6805

Jul 28-Aug 1 eighth International Congress on the Biology of Fish Portland, Oregon http://fishbiologycongress8.usgs.gov/

Aug 17-21 American Fisheries Society 138th Annual Meeting ottawa, Ontario, Canada www.fisheries.org

Aug 25-29 Fourth International Symposium on FISH-GIS/Spatial Analysis rio de Janeiro, Brazil www.esl.co.jp/Sympo/4th/index.htm

Sep 15-18 2008 Conference: Australian Society for Fish Biology: Assessing Recreational Fisheries: Current and Future Challenges bondi Beach, Sydney, Australia www.asfb.org.au

Sep 15-18 Aquaculture Europe 2008 Krakow, Poland www.easonline.org

Sep 22-26 ices 2008 Annual Science Conference Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada www.ices.dk/iceswork/asc/2008/index.asp

244 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Sep 28-Oct 2 Pathways to Success 2008 Conference: Integrating Human Dimensions into Fisheries and Wildlife Management increasing Human Capacity for Global Human-Wildlife Coexistence Estes Park, Colorado www.warnercnr.colostate.edu/nrt/hdfw/partners.html [email protected]

Oct 11-15 Fourth National Conference on Coastal and Estuarine Habitat Restoration providence, Rhode Island www.estuaries.org/?id=4

Oct 12-15 62nd Annual Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Conference Corpus Christi, Texas http://seafwa2008.org

Oct 19-22 women Evolving Biological Sciences Seattle, Washington www.webs.washington.edu

Oct 19-24 international Aquarium Congress 2008 Shanghai, China www.iac2008.cn

Oct 20-24 Fifth World Fisheries Congress 2008 Pacifico Yokohama, Japan www.5thwfc2008.com, [email protected], +81-3-3219-3541

Oct 28-29 coastal Research Symposium Biloxi, Mississippi, http://masgc.orgbaysandbayous

Nov 10-13 Fifth World Recreational Fishing Conference Dania Beach, Florida www.igfa.org, 954/927-2628.

Nov 11-14 north American Lake Management Society Symposium Lake Louise, Alberta, Canada www.nalms.org

Nov 14-16 third International Bonefish andT arpon Symposium: Research and Conservation for the Future Dania Beach and Islamorada, Florida [email protected]

Nov 23-25 international Symposium on the Bearing-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 3-4 11th Flatfish Biology Conference Westbrook, Connecticut, http://mi.nefsc.noaa.gov/flatfishbiologyworkshop, [email protected], 203/882-6549

2 0 0 9

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

Jan 15-18 Spring Meeting of the Southern Division and Louisiana Chapter of the AFS New Orleans, Louisiana www.sdafs.org/meetings

May 25-29 8th Indo-Pacific Fish Conference Fremantle, Western Australia

Jun 23-26 international Paleolimnology Symposium Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico www.paleolim.org

Aug 30-Sep 3 American Fisheries Society 139th Annual Meeting Nashville, Tennessee www.fisheries.org

Aug 14-17 Aquaculture Europe 2009 Trondheim, Norway www.easonline.org

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 245 Steven H. Ranney Column: Steven Ranney is an M.S. student in Wildlife and Students' Angle Fisheries Sciences at South Dakota State University, Brookings, and serves as the secretary-treasurer of the AFS Student Subsection of the Education Section. Ranney can be contacted at [email protected].

Student Peer Reviewer: Benefits for the Profession and the Student

Peer review is the process of certify- peer review should be the content and the crux of a good manuscript review— ing new science (Berkenkotter 1995). science of a paper (Hoppin 2002). The looking intently at the data analysis and Certifying research by other profes- AFS has published rubrics designed to write-up, and evaluating the science. sionals allows a discipline to maintain assist reviewers, but most reviewers Quality reviews are focused on the high standards of research quality and will necessarily find their own method content and science of a manuscript credibility to peers and the public. Few for providing a review (Benos et al. rather than simply on proofread- scientists can imagine progress with- 2003). Of course, the quality of the ing and recitation of editorial com- out the peer-review process (Laine and review is important, and the worst ments. Grammar and editorial issues Mulrow 2003). At the recent student review an editor can get is the simple should have been addressed by the colloquium at the American Fisheries “it looks good.” As a result, reviews author prior to manuscript submis- Society (AFS) Annual Meeting in San should be of a quality that editors can sion. This will allow the reviewer to Francisco, the guest presentations and decide whether or not to publish the focus on questions regarding the discussion focused on writing and submitted manuscript. While there structure and timeliness of the paper publishing. As a part of this discus- are no standard guidelines for review- in addition to the novelty of the idea. sion, it became apparent that many ing manuscripts, the “golden rule” While commenting on poor grammar students were not aware that they taught in grade school should always and “hasty” presentation should be could be involved in the review pro- apply: treat a manuscript you are secondary to evaluating the content cess. While students have always been reviewing the same way you would of the paper, the negative conse- welcome as peer reviewers, student want your manuscript reviewed (Benos quences of not correcting such mis- participation has waned in recent years. et al. 2003). As reviewers, the goal takes (e.g., harsh reviews as a result Indeed, as the future of the fisheries should be to provide a critique that of poor grammar) during preparation profession (Kohler 2005), students is positive, critical yet objective and are well deserved (Hoppin 2002). have a professional obligation to be balanced, and returned promptly. Guidelines for reviewing original involved in the peer-review process. Because a reviewer is asked to give scientific articles are available (Hansen Additionally, all three presenters at an informed opinion of the manu- 2002; Hoppin 2002; Benow et al. the colloquium indicated that student script, the review needs to be well 2003; Provenzale and Stanley 2006). involvement in the peer-review process written. The editor should be able to The AFS also provides a reviewing enhances a student’s critical review- accurately determine the reviewer’s rubric to those who have agreed to ing and writing skills and would be a thoughts and weigh them along with be peer reviewers. These guidelines benefit to the profession. This article those of other reviewers. Reviewers give excellent methods for evaluat- is meant to describe the elements of a should comment only on aspects of ing a manuscript’s acceptability and good critical review. More importantly, the work where they have familiarity should be followed. Eventually, the this discussion will hopefully serve as (Benos et al. 2003), but understanding style of a reviewer will change with a catalyst for getting more students the science and logic of the manuscript time and experience (Benos et al. involved in the peer-review process. is the primary goal of the reviewer 2003) and the AFS guidelines can be (Hoppin 2002). The reviewer should replaced with personal guidelines. What are the provide citations for justification of their elements of a good arguments when they disagree with Student Reviewers critical review? the author. While reading the manu- Benefit Both the script, the reviewer should be asking Profession and Peer reviewers are the quality control themselves questions such as: has the the Student of scientific journals (Berkenkotter author acknowledged other reason- 1995). The qualities of a good review able hypotheses? Have the authors Student involvement in the review are common to most disciplines, but discussed differences found in their process is beneficial in several ways. The there are no universally accepted work and the results of others? What primary reason is that it helps establish standards for high-quality peer review critical aspects of the scientific method students as fisheries professionals and (Frank 1996). The primary focus of any are missing from this research? This is allows them to contribute to science.

246 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Being involved in the review process is comm.). In addition, because students the quality of future manuscripts. not only a way to contribute to the pro- are engrossed in the primary litera- Editors of AFS journals will appreci- fession, but for students, it is also a way ture, editors find student reviews more ate students’ commitments to the to increase the quality of their own writ- pointed. One of the reasons students field of fisheries and students will ing. The act of reviewing others’ work are useful in the review process is that enjoy investing in the field in which facilitates better writing through honing they bring with them new ideas—a they will work for years to come. one’s reviewing skills. Reviewing manu- fresh way of thinking—without being scripts allows readers the opportunity biased by years of practicing within one Acknowledgements to improve their own work by critically particular paradigm. In other words, evaluating the logic of others. Reading students at all levels are open to new Michael Quist committed his scientific papers is an excellent way of ideas and may bring to the table new time to discuss this topic and pro- learning how (or how not) to write. In ways of evaluating old problems. vided editorial comments on an fact, 65% of those students surveyed earlier draft of this manuscript. indicated that one of the ways through How can students Jeffrey Jolley and Melissa Wuellner which they learned to write was review- get involved? also provided helpful comments. ing the work of others (Jolley and Graeb 2007). While reviewing a paper does Recently, the Student Subsection of References take substantial intellectual effort and the AFS sent an e-mail to the student represents a significant time investment, listserv encouraging students to reg- Benos, D. J., K. L. Kirk, and J. E. student participation in the peer-review ister on a student reviewer database. Hall. 2003. How to review a process helps to fulfill our responsibil- This student reviewer database is now paper. Advances in Physiology ity to past, current, and future fisheries accessible to AFS editors and associ- Education 27:47-52. professionals in making a meaning- ate editors. Those students who did Berkenkotter, C. 1995. The ful contribution to the profession. not receive the e-mail can view the power and perils of peer review. Most good reviewers believe that requirements on the Student Subsection Rhetoric Review 13:245-248. maintaining the high standards of webpage at www.fisheries.org/units/ Frank, E. 1996. Editors’ requests of research is critical to the progress of edustu/announcements.htm by clicking reviewers: a study and a proposal. science (Hoppin 2002). Further, many the link under the "Student Reviewers Preventive Medicine 25:102-104. reviewers see the peer-review process Needed" section. The nomadic nature Hansen, M. J. 2002. Reviewer rights and as a responsibility to their field and of student life will require the data- responsibilities. Fisheries 27(10):32-33. find that reviewing helps them remain base to be updated yearly. Usage of Hoppin, F. G. 2002. How I review an on the cutting edge of science (Laine the student reviewer database will be original scientific article. American Journal of Respiratory Critical and Mulrow 2003). Upon being asked left up to the editors of AFS journals. Care Medicine 166:1019-1023. to provide a review, students may be Students may or may not be called Jolley, J. C., and B. D. S. Graeb. hesitant to give their expert opinion on upon to be reviewers, but if asked, it is 2007. Writing, publishing, and a subject on which they may have little their responsibility to strongly consider reviewing: the students’ perspec- knowledge. For many students, the providing a review (Hansen 2002). tive. Fisheries 32(1):40-43. hesitation and nervousness they may Reviewing a scientific manuscript Kohler, C. 2005. Student AFS have about providing a good review requires a significant intellectual members: lifeblood and life- is often accompanied by an unusually investment, but the benefits of being line. Fisheries 30(10):4. high attention to detail during the peer- a reviewer far outweigh the time Laine, C., and C. Mulrow. 2003. review process. This is especially why commitments required. Beginning a Peer review: integral to science and editors enjoy having student reviewers. professional journey is only one of indispensable to Annals. Annals of As a result of their eagerness to be thor- the benefits gained by investing time Internal Medicine 13:1038-1040. ough, editors find student reviews to be in maintaining the high standards of Provenzale, J. M., and R. J. Stanley. detail oriented and are commonly more published research. The improvement 2006. A systematic guide to review- thorough than those from non-students in critical thinking through acting as ing a manuscript. Journal of Nuclear (M. Quist, Iowa State University, pers. a reviewer will surely be reflected in Medicine Technology 34:92-99.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 247 Obituaries: George Ridgway and Carl Eldon Bond

An era in the initial applications Following the attack on Pearl of genetic markers to identify and Harbor, Bond worked as a civilian manage fish populations ended employee of the Army during con- when George Ridgway, 85, struction of Camp Adair while he was passed away on 16 February 2007 waiting for his induction into the U.S. in Augusta, Maine. With a Ph.D. in Navy. He married Lenora D. Jensen Carl Bond microbiology from the University of in Monmouth in June 1942. Carl Washington, Ridgway initially joined served with the Naval Construction the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Battalion (Seabees) for more than For many years, Bond was on the at the Western Fish Nutrition three years in Sierra Leone, Africa; “Names of Fishes” committee for Laboratory in Cook, Washington, Honolulu, Hawaii; and Midway Island. the American Fisheries Society. He in 1953. He transferred to the Bond received his bachelor’s degree designed and taught one of the first Bureau of Commercial Fisheries in 1947 and master’s degree in 1948 U.S. university courses in aquaculture. (BCF) Montlake Laboratory (then in fisheries and wildlife fromO regon He met with many dignitaries dur- under the Fish and Wildlife Service) State College. In 1950, he joined the ing his career; while in Japan, he was in Seattle in 1955. There he estab- faculty of the Department of Fish and privileged to take tea with Japan’s lished an immunological research Game Management (later Fisheries then crown prince Akihito [himself group intended to use heritable dif- and Wildlife) and remained with the an ichthyologist], now emperor. ferences in blood groups and pro- department throughout his career. Among his awards, Bond was teins to identify continental origins Teaching loads were heavy at first; named "Oregon Scientist of the Year" of salmon harvested in international he taught three courses each term in 1983 by the Oregon Academy of waters under the International and advised about 50 undergradu- Science. He received the American North Pacific Fisheries Commission. ates. Bond studied at the University Fisheries Society Award of Excellence He transferred to the BCF Boothbay of Michigan in 1959–60 and was in 1998 and its Distinguished Service Harbor Laboratory in Maine in 1964 inducted into Phi Beta Kappa. He Award in 2000. He was also honored and ended his career at Woods received his Ph.D. from Michigan in by the Desert Fishes Council. Of all Hole Laboratory. Ridgway initiated 1963. When he retired as professor his accomplishments, Bond was most a continuity of management-related emeritus in 1985, scientists came proud of his students. During his long genetic research in the Pacific from many countries to wish him well. career, he mentored 63 graduate Northwest, where his initial visions And he continued active research students, 15 doctoral, and 48 masters. were perpetuated and ultimately and writing for years after that. Many of these students went on to fulfilled. He will be remembered Bond was an active member and distinguished careers of their own. for this achievement and for being fellow in many professional orga- Bond was interested in many a true scholar and a gentleman. nizations, including the American things, particularly the sanctity of —Fred Utter Fisheries Society, American Society the living world. He treasured time of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, spent with his family and “give and Carl Eldon Bond, 87, passed away the Gilbert Ichthyological Society, take” with friends and colleagues. in Corvallis, Oregon, in November and the American Institute of He was an avid hunter and fisher- 2007. He was born in Culdesac, Fishery Research Biologists. man and an accomplished knife Idaho, the youngest of six children. During his career, Bond taught maker. His twinkling eyes, warm His family moved to Monmouth when and had projects in many countries, smile, and keen sense of humor will Carl was two years old. After gradu- including India, Iran, Taiwan, Thailand, be greatly missed. Contributions ating from high school, he attended Japan, Hong Kong, and Chile. He in his memory can be made to the Oregon Normal School in Monmouth was considered a world authority Carl and Lenora Bond Scholarship and subsequently taught elementary on sculpins. He was the author of Fund, c/o OSU Foundation, 835 SW school on the Oregon coast until an undergraduate textbook, Biology 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333. the beginning of World War II. of Fishes, which is still in use today. —Jim Hall

248 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g update: LegISLAtIOn AnD POLICy Continued from page 214

could be disastrous to the economy, John Cruden, deputy assis- HR 5949, the “Clean Boating Act of agriculture, personal land use rights, tant attorney general of the u.S. 2008,” reverses a recent California and the rights of states and locali- department of Justice’s environmental district Court decision that directed ties to manage their own land. and Natural resources division, the EPA to impose fi nes on rec- John paul Woodly, Jr., Assistant focused on an explaining the statu- reational boaters for discharges Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, tory and case law context of the that are incidental to the normal stated that the u.S. Army Corps rapanos decision. As a result of operation of recreational boats. of Engineers remains fully commit- this decision, he stated that the ted to protecting u.S. waters as department of Justice has fi led more 2008 FArM bILL intended by Congress and expected than 45 briefs in more than 30 federal court proceedings in which geo- by the American people. He further On 14 May 2008, the House of graphic jurisdiction under the CWA explained that although there are Representatives passed the confer- was a signifi cant issue, including ongoing legal and policy challenges ence report on HR 2419, the Food, briefs in 9 of the 13 Courts of Appeal. facing the Army’s regulatory program, Conservation, and energy Act of currently the program is operating He closed his testimony by stating 2008. HR 2419 includes an increase robustly, protecting the environment, the Department of Justice takes seri- of $7.9 billion in total spending for and supporting over $220 billion in ously its obligation to protect public conservation programs. Some con- economic development annually. health and the environment, and to servation programs affected include: Chief Arlen lancaster of the u.S. enforce and defend the existing laws. department of Agriculture (uSdA) trAnsit, BoAting, cLimAte • Extending the popular Natural resource Conservation Conservation reserve program, Service stated that in total, the uSdA chAnge, AnD wAter resoUrces LegisLAtion allowing 32 million more acres believes that NrCS authorities for to be enrolled in the pro- wetlands compliance and restora- On 15 May 2008, the House gram from 2010-2012. tion activities under the Farm bill Committee on Transportation and • Expanding the Wetlands would not be affected by HR 2421 Infrastructure approved HR 6052, Reserve Program by provid- and that a change in defi nition would the “Saving energy Through public not impact the implementation of ing funds to reestablish a Transportation Act of 2008.” The uSdA’s programs. He also stated baseline of $1.3 billion and legislation provides support to that it is possible that enactment of extending it through 2012. public transportation agencies and • Strengthening the Environmental HR 2421 would lead to more pro- increases incentives for commut- ducers falling under the regulatory ers to choose transit options. It also Quality Incentives program by purview of the Clean Water Act, increases the federal share for clean increasing funding by $3.4 billion. which in turn could lead to increased fuel and alternative fuel transit bus, • Extending the Conservation compliance costs for producers. ferry, or locomotive-related equip- Security Program by providing $1.1 benjamin Grumbles, assistant ment or facilities, which will reduce billion in new funding to enroll administrator of water for the u.S. transportation-related emissions. nearly 13 million acres per year. environmental protection Agency Also approved was HR 2452, • Providing new resources (epA), stated that the epA is strongly the “Sewage overfl ow Community to protect and restore the committed to the protection of Right-to-Know Act,” which provides a wetlands and believes that a good uniform national standard for pub- Chesapeake Bay Region. job is being done under the current lic notifi cation of combined sewer • Extending the Small statutory framework. He explained overfl ows and sanitary sewer over- Watershed rehabilitation that proposed changes might be fl ows. The committee also approved Program through 2012. construed to expand the scope of HR 5770, which requires the National • Reauthorizing the Wildlife CWA authorities in unintended Academy of Sciences to study the Habitat Incentives program. ways and lead to protracted litiga- potential impacts of climate change tion. He asserted that the bill also on water resources and water quality. • Creating an Open Fields Program seems likely to have implications for In addition, the committee to provide incentives to state states and tribes, who work collab- approved a bill to restore a decades- governments and Indian tribes to oratively with epA and the Corps to old exemption under the Clean provide public access to private achieve the act’s water quality goals. Water Act for recreational boats. land for hunting and fi shing.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 249 Publications: New Titles

New Titles stream biota, community interactions, Gray, R. M. Hughes, and M. R. Meader. ecosystem processes, and ecosystem American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Ecological Geography of the Sea. quality. Each of the 36 chapters is Maryland. 2005. 423 pp., $69 (paper); Second edition, By A. Longhurst. written by an expert in the field. Most www.afsbooks.org/x54047xm.html. Academic Press, New York. 2007. 542 chapters end with sections on specific Fish Endocrinology. Volumes 1 and pp. $49.95 (paper); www.elsevier. methods, materials, and supplies. This 2. Edited by M. Reinecke, G. Zaccone, com/wps/find/bookdescription.cws_ synthetic and comprehensive book and B. G. Kapoor. Science Publishers, home/708929/description#description. will appeal to a wide range of readers, Enfield, New Hampshire. 2006. 912 This is a much expanded new edi- from undergraduates to practitioners. tion of the 1998 text which focused pp. $151.20 (cloth); www.scipub.net/ Salmon 2100: The Future of Wild primarily on the planktonic ecosys- fisheries/fish-endocrinology.html. Pacific Salmon. Edited by R.T. Lackey, tem. The new book has 12 chap- D. H. Lach, S.L. Duncan. American GIS for Environmental ters which now include, in addition Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland. Management. By R. Scally. ESRI to general marine biogeography, 2006. 629 pp. $39.00 (cloth); http:// Press, Redlands, California. 2006. explicit connections between ben- afsbooks.org/x55050xm.html. This 202 pp., $24.95 (paper); http://gis. thic and pelagic processes. The last volume is a sober look at the future of esri.com/esripress/display/index.cfm? four chapters (and two-thirds of the Pacific salmon. It addresses the impor- fuseaction=display&websiteID=106. length of the text) are devoted to tant policy issues that surround salmon detailed examination of biomes and Leviathan: The History of Whaling management and the likelihood that provinces of the four major oceans. in America. By E. J. Dolin. W. W. there will be salmon populations in Norton and Company, New York. Fisheries Management: Progress western North America 100 years from 2007. 479 pp., $27.95 (cloth); towards Sustainability. Edited by now. The book contains 23 papers with $15.95 (paper); www.wwnorton. T. McClanahan, and J. C. Castilla. 3 introductory and 2 concluding chap- com/catalog/spring07/006057.htm. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. 2007. ters. The book should broadly interest 332 pp. $199.99 (cloth); www. policy managers and scientists that pro- Monitoring Stream and blackwellpublishing.com/book. duce information used by managers. Watershed Restoration. Edited asp?ref=9781405139328&site=1. by P. Roni. American Fisheries This volume is the result of discussions For Your Information Society, Bethesda, Maryland. 2005. by members of the Pew Fellows in 350 pp., $65 (paper); http://store. Marine Conservation. It begins with a afsbooks.org/x55047xm.html. summary of the status of the world’s Alaska Crab Stock: Enhancement fisheries and is followed by 12 case and Rehabilitation. Edited by B. G. Partnerships for a Common studies which emphasize both setbacks Stevens. Alaska Sea Grant College Purpose: Cooperative Fisheries and successes in the management Program, Kodiak. 2006. 94 pp., Research and Management. process by authors who participated $10.00 (paper); seagrant.uaf.edu/ Edited by A. N. Read, and T. W. in the fisheries they describe. The bookstore/pubs/AK-SG-06-04.html. Hartley. American Fisheries Society, book ends with a synthesis and a look Aquaculture Engineering. By O. Bethesda, Maryland. 2006. 270 forward written by the co-editors. The Lekang. Blackwell Publishing, Ames, pp., $60.00 (cloth); www.afs- perspective is international, focusing Iowa. 2007. 352 pp., $199.99 (cloth); books.org/x54052xm.html. on small-scale fisheries and innova- www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/ tive management approaches Scallop Farming. By D. Hardy. Second productCd-1405126108.html. edition. Blackwell Publishing, Ames, Methods in Stream Ecology, 2nd Choosing a Conservation Vocation Iowa. 2006. 328 pp. $139.99 (cloth); edition. Edited by F.R. Hauer and G. A. or a Bureaucratic Career: Personal www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/ Lamberti. Academic Press, Burlington, Choices and the Environmental productCd-1405113634.html. Massachusetts. 2006. 875 pp. $93.00 Consequences. By R. Kroger. (cloth); www.elsevier.com/wps/find/ Shrimp Culture: Economics, Market, Trafford Publishing, Victoria, British bookdescription.cws_home/708163/ and Trade. Edited by P. Leung, and Columbia. 2005. 162 pp., $14.39 description#description. This wide- C. Engle. Blackwell Publishing, Ames, (paper); www.trafford.com/05-1920. ranging edited volume contains Iowa. 2006. 335 pp., $179.99 (cloth); detailed chapters on physical processes, Effects of Urbanization on Stream www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/ material transport uptake and storage, Ecosystems. Edited by L. Brown, R. G. productCd-0813826551.html.

250 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 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.fi sheries.org/mcf. EDITORIAL BOARD Don Noakes, Canada (Editor-in-Chief) Louis Botsford, USA Michelle Heupel, Australia Richard Brill, USA Suam Kim, South Korea Howard I. Browman, Norway Kristi Miller, Canada Anthony Charles, Canada Anthony Overton, USA Jim Cowan, USA Ana Parma, Argentina Paul Dayton, USA Kenneth Rose, USA Syma Ebbin, USA Carl Walters, Canada Tim Essington, USA Alejandro Yáñez-Arancibia, Mexico

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 251 UPDATE: ANNUAL Meeting Plenary Session

Title How Do We Ensure Our Sustainable Future? The goal of the 2008 Plenary Session is to deliver a thought-provoking and engaging series of presentations about issues affecting fisheries and fisheries professionals in the workplace. We will examine the meeting theme, Fisheries in Flux: How Do We Ensure Our Sustainable Future?, by exploring the biological, political, and social constraints within which we work. Fish communities and fisheries are not static properties of ecosystems—an observation that challenges our understand- ing of ecosystems and how we approach natural resource management. To better understand dynamic systems, we must study ecological conditions at multiple points in time, implying that we have much to learn from the past and that baselines are crucial to our understanding. William Gilly will illustrate this through his experience with the Sea of Cortez Expedition and Education Project that retraced the 1940 voyage undertaken by John Steinbeck and in the Sea of Cortez. Although fisheries professionals may be armed with the latest data, the best scientific models, and the new- est approaches, fisheries science advice may not carry the impact we desire.Jake Rice will challenge us to consider how discussions of economic incentives can promote fisheries goals and reduce ecosystem impacts. His examples from Canadian and European fisheries will shed new light on how we manage fisheries throughout the world. Finally, the fisheries professionals who manage fisheries, conduct research, and set policy are critical to ensuring the sustainable future of our fisheries resources.S ally Guynn will help us understand our important role as leaders of change, and how professional communities and their culture can facilitate the realization of sustainable fisheries. Change in the Gulf of California: What is the future of the “Aquarium to the World?” William Gilly continue to do so. Large fishes Hopkins Marine Station, and snails have been replaced Stanford University by smaller individuals of other Mexico’s Gulf of California, species; Humboldt squid have a UNESCO World Heritage replaced yellowfin tuna as a Site, is a sea of exceptional dominant pelagic predator; a productivity where “…almost mesopelagic hypoxic zone has all major oceanographic pro- greatly expanded; and vast cesses occurring in the planet’s agriculture, aquaculture, and oceans are present…, giving it tourism industries have arisen. extraordinary importance for “Far from being the remote the study of marine and coastal of 20 years ago, processes” (http://whc.unesco. Cabo San Lucas beckons to 400 org/en/list/1182). It is home to cruise ships a year. Over one 5,000 species of invertebrate million annual visitors can’t be macrofauna, nearly 1,000 spe- wrong.” (www.loscabosguide. cies of fish, and 40% of the com/cabosanlucas/index.html). world’s marine mammal species. In 2004 Gilly led the Sea of Although the gulf has been Cortez Expedition and Education studied by at least 500 scien- have touched all parts of the gulf. The Project (www.seaofcortez.org) tific cruises since 1825, relatively few Steinbeck-Ricketts expedition of 1940 that retraced the legendary 1940 voy- studies have taken a holistic view or provides a unique baseline for compari- age of John Steinbeck and Ed Ricketts explicitly addressed long-term changes son with more recent observations of in an effort to discern long-term in this storied body of water. Since intertidal, pelagic, and human com- ecological changes and to consider 1935, a variety of human activities, munities. Although the gulf remains them in light of human activities. He ranging from damming the Colorado a stunningly beautiful and productive continues to study Humboldt squid in River to constructing Cabo San Lucas, place, it indeed has changed and will the Sea of Cortez and PacificO cean.

252 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Linking Ecology to Economics— Rice has been increasingly interested in methods for Advice with Impact increasing the impact of science advice on policy and man- agement decision making, prompting current work on the interactions of social and economic incentives with bio- logical advice, and he has served as science advisor to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans International Policy group.

Taking the Lead

Jake Rice Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Canada Science advice to policymakers has often been to reduce exploitation rates and allow stocks to rebuild, with the short- term sacrifice repaid through higher sustainable harvests from larger and more resilient stocks. Such advice often has ended up not being reflected in decision making, presumably to avoid the short-term costs. This apparent disconnect has Sally Guynn been a major source of frustration to the science community. Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Scientists often blame short-term political considerations for The third critical factor in a virtual equation for ensur- outweighing sustainability and conservation, yet no decision ing the sustainable future of fisheries is the human fac- maker wants to leave a legacy of ecological—and the con- tor. Fisheries are as great as the people who make them sequent social and economic—disaster. Correspondingly, in happen. But how do fisheries professionals effectively the past decade at least four different pathways have been lead in a time of flux while facing the perfect storm? The explored for breaking the disconnect between science advice importance of fisheries professionals as leaders of change, and decision making: improved communication of science, and the constraints and opportunities for leveraging our adoption of rule-based decision-making, advocacy science, and individual and corporate strength, will be explored. linking ecological sciences to social and economic sciences. Sally Angus Guynn is a senior organization devel- The talk will consider all four pathways; the first three opment consultant with the Association of Fish and briefly. Rice will argue that the potential for greatest progress Wildlife Agencies Management Assistance Team in strengthening the impact of sound science advice can be (MAT). She also serves as the executive director of made in linking the advice to actions for addressing perverse the National Conservation Leadership Institute. social and economic incentives that foster a political receptiv- ity to short-sighted decision making. If the incentive structures in fisheries promote a longer-term view by the resource users, AFS 2008 they naturally become allies with the ecologists in support- Annual Meeting ing politicians who show long-term vision in their decisions. The talk will review some major economic instruments for fisheries management from an ecological perspective, and highlight inherent affinities between the objectives of both the science advice and the social and economic instruments. The talk concludes with some optimistic words about the types of research partnerships that may really make a dif- ference in achieving sustainable fisheries on healthy stocks, and in communities and ecosystems that are both resilient.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 253 This long-awaited text is an excellent companion to AFS’s Fisheries Techniques because it provides a frame of reference for appropriate sample design, analysis, and interpretation of freshwater fisheries data. The chapters are organized by fish and fisheries data types, including recruitment, mortality, biotelemetry, habitat, and predator-prey interactions, within major topic areas, such as population dynamics, fish biology, and community assessment. Chapters contain subsections describing the data type(s), indices, appropriate and alternative statistical approaches, applications, summary, and references. Statistical tests are nestled within chapters to allow the reader to connect analyses to data types. Box examples allow the reader to easily follow the analysis method. The companion CD contains example data sets and programs so the reader can run the analyses, as outlined in the box examples. The book is appropriate for advanced undergraduate and graduate students and is a practical resource for fisheries professionals. Includes a subject index.

961 pages, hardcover, TO ORDER: index, companion CD Online: www.fisheries.org (box example programs and click on “Bookstore” and data) American Fisheries Society List price: $98.00 c/o Books International AFS Member price: $69.00 P.O. Box 605 Herndon, VA 20172 Item Number: 550.49C Published September 2007 Phone: 703/661-1570

Fax: 703/996-1010

254 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 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.org and click Job Postings.

Postdoctoral Research Associate, of the nutritional requirements Aquaculture Researcher II, School of Aquatic and Fishery of specific life stages of marine Fisheries and Illinois Aquaculture Sciences, University of Washington. finfish under culture with the Center, Carbondale. Responsibilities: goal improving stock health and Responsibilities: Assist with Work with an international team survivorship. ongoing research projects in an of scientists that is evaluating the Qualifications: Ph.D. granted aquaculture nutrition/physiology program, including general ecological impacts that follow from within the past 5 years in a maintenance of aquaculture the implementation of dedicated relevant field. Will also consider a facilities and equipment, access privilege fisheries systems. DVM with demonstrated interest For more project information overseeing research trials, and and experience in aquatic animal involvement in data collection and see http://fish.washington.edu/ nutrition research. research/dap/ and for more dataset management. Other duties Closing date: 1 June 2008. assigned as necessary to facilitate information about the position aquaculture-related research. see at http://fish.washington.edu/ Contact: [email protected]. Twelve-month term position with research/dap/PostDocDescription. opportunity for renewal. pdf. M.S. Graduate Research Qualifications: M.S. or B.S. Assistantship, Fisheries and Illinois Qualifications: Ph.D. in ecology, equivalent experience in fisheries, biology or a related field, Aquaculture Center, Carbondale. aquaculture or related discipline. a sound foundation in statistics Responsibilities: Conduct Experience in aquatic animal and quantitative analysis of research on otolith and fin ray husbandry and research project complex data, and demonstrated microchemistry as indicators of management desired, and ability ability to publish peer-reviewed fish environmental history. to acquire and master new skills in a laboratory setting. Must have papers. Qualifications: B.S. in fisheries or Salary: $45,000–50,000 per valid Illinois drivers license or be a closely related field. Must meet able to readily obtain one, be year plus benefits, depending on admission requirements for the able to lift 50 lbs. safely, and be applicant's experience. Full time graduate school and Department available to occasionally work after effective immediately through of Zoology at SIUC (see http:// hours, weekends and/or holidays as September 2009, with prospects www.science.siu.edu/zoology/ project demands dictate. for extending the duration of the programs-graduate.html). Salary: Commensurate with position. experience. Salary: $16,250/year plus Closing date: Until filled. full tuition waiver. Closing date: 30 June 2008 or Contact: Send a CV and a brief until filled. Closing date: 3 June statement of qualifications to Tim Contact: Submit letter of 2008 or until filled. Essington, [email protected]. application, transcript and resume edu. For information phone Contact: Submit letter of interest, to Jesse Trushenski, Fisheries Illinois 206/616-3698. resume, contact information Aquaculture Center, Mailcode for three references, copies of 6511, Southern Illinois University, transcripts and GRE scores to Carbondale, Illinois 62901-6511; Postdoctoral Research Associate Greg Whitledge, Southern Illinois 618/536-7761. in Fish Nutrition, Hubbs-SeaWorld University, Fisheries and Illinois Research Institute, California. Aquaculture Center, Carbondale, Postdoctoral Position— Responsibilities: Develop and Illinois 62901-6511; 618/453-6089; Applied Conservation Science, execute a fish nutrition research [email protected]. See http://fisheries. Department of Biology, Tennessee program to advance understanding siu.edu/. Technical University.

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 255 Responsibilities: Plan and Contact: E-mail cover letter, Qualifications: M.S. in applied facilitate science advisory contact information for 2 statistics, biostatistics, or closely meetings (45%), make specialized references, CV, and unofficial related field. Minimum of 3 presentations and provide other transcripts to Yolanda Morbey, years experience, including support as needed to develop [email protected]. Early environmental data analysis and Habitat Conservation Plans (15%). applications will be appreciated. SAS programming. Knowledge of Conduct research pertinent to the GIS, MATLAB, and R programming HCPs and co-author two HCPs M.S. Research Assistantship language a plus. (40%). in Stream Ecology, Department Salary: Depends on experience. Qualifications: Ph.D. in ecology, of Natural Resources and Closing date: 31 August 2008. wildlife sciences, conservation Environmental Sciences, University Contact: Send cover letter biology or related field. Early- of Illinois. and resume to: Normandeau career scientist to develop applied Responsibilities: Evaluate the Associates, Inc., Attn: Robyn conservation science skills. spatial variability of stream mussel Chadwick, 25 Nashua Road, Salary: $38,000 with full benefits assemblages. Bedford, New Hampshire 03110; and supplies/travel funds, Qualifications: Interests in stream [email protected]; fax renewable annually for 2–3 ecology, be highly motivated 603/471-0874 years based on performance and self-organized, and able to funding. work independently. Experience JIMAR PIFSC Fishery Scientist: Closing date: 30 June 2008. in mussel identifications and ID#28115—RCUH Non-Civil Contact: Hayden Mattingly, biostatistics will be assets. Service, School of Ocean and Department of Biology, Box Minimum academic qualifications Earth Science and Technology, 5063, Cookeville, Tennessee include a B.S. in ecology, zoology, Joint Institute for Marine and 38505; [email protected], or closely related field, 1100 on Atmospheric Research, National 931/372-6410. the GREs combined verbal and Marine Fisheries Service, Pacific quantitative, and a 3.0 GPA. Islands Fisheries Science Center, Field Research Assistant, Additional graduate program Honolulu, Hawaii. University of Western Ontario, SE information can be found at: www. Responsibilities: Analyze fishery British Columbia. nres.uiuc.edu. statistics, data collected from Responsibilities: Travel to and Salary: $1,500 per month for biological and oceanographic from London, Ontario. Assist 11-month plus tuition waiver and surveys, and other information. a graduate student with field benefit. Construct mathematical and research on the reproductive timing Closing date: 30 July 2008. statistical models, including and behaviour of kokanee salmon. Contact: Send a cover letter, computer simulation models of Qualifications: B.S. in fisheries or resume, copies of transcripts, GRE fish populations and fisheries wildlife experience. Perform field scores, and the contact information to study dynamics and effects work in a remote location. Strong of three references to Yong Cao, of natural and anthropogenic work ethic, attention to detail, Illinois Natural History Survey 217 factors on fishery yields and ablility to live in close quarters with 244-6847, yongcao@ uiuc.edu. other characteristics. Assist others. in establishing overfishing Salary: $1,600–2,000 CND per Data Analyst, Normandeau guidelines and reference points for month depending on experience. Associates, Inc., New Hampshire. determination of stock status is in Work from 15 August–5 October Responsibilities: Work closely compliance. Evaluate alternative 2008. with project scientists to analyze fishery management strategies Closing date: 1 July 2008. data and prepare tables and charts. and policies with respect to their

256 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g yield characteristics and impact stock assessment theory and employment is dependent upon on fish stocks. Issue scientific methods. Working knowledge program and operational needs, reports and advisories to National and experience in application of satisfactory work performance, and Marine Fisheries Service managers statistical methods to problems availability of funds. and constituents. Publish research in fisheries, ecology, and wildlife Salary: $3,620 per month, findings and present results at science. Ability and experience in scientific conferences and public the development and application minimum. meetings. of computer simulation models. Closing date: 31 July 2008. Qualifications: M.S. in biology, Ability to communicate effectively Contact: Apply at www.rcuh. zoology, oceanography, fisheries, with scientists, managers, and com For more information contact or related field. 1–3 years the public. Must meet security Nicole Wakazuru 808/956-9465. experience in fisheries stock requirements for working in a U.S. assessment research, population federal facility. Must be able to monitoring, and population withstand uncomfortable living North Pacific Groundfish modeling. Broad knowledge of conditions at sea for up to 30 Observer, Alaskan Observers, Inc., fish population dynamics and days at a time. Continuation of Seattle, Washington.

2008 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. 5, May 2008

Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 257 Responsibilities: Gather of harvest permit cards and Salary: Grade 18, $26,415 management data for the declarations of intent. per year. Salary above $26,415 government. Live and work aboard Qualifications: B.S. from an requires exceptional qualifications U.S.-flagged commercial fishing accredited college or university as determined by the Office of vessels operating in the Bering Sea in biology, natural science, Personnel Management. and North Pacific Oceans. Training natural resources management, Closing date: 26 October 2007. in Anchorage, Alaska. Make 2 botany, marine biology, fisheries deployments of approximately 2 management, zoology, or a natural Contact: See www.agfc.com/ 1/2 to 3 months each within 7 resources management related field employment/. For additional months of completion of training. of study. Preference to candidates information contact Melissa Jones, Qualifications: B.S. in fisheries with up to one year experience 877/625-7521. biology, marine biology, general working with Microsoft Access. biology, zoology, or a related Salary: $31,461–40,441, Marine Stewardship Council natural science. contractual, no benefits. Chain of Custody Auditor, MRAG Salary: $3,900–6,006 per month, Closing date: 26 October 2008. depending on experience, plus Americas. Contact: www.dnr.state.md.us/hr/ room, board, and travel to Responsibilities: Perform Chain jobs.asp. and from job site. Subsequent of Custody Certifications on an deployment opportunities and as-needed, contractual basis and salary advances available. Fisheries Biologist I, Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, write audit reports for seafood Closing date: 17 September 2008. processors, distributors, retailers, Positions available year-round. Fisheries Division, Mammoth and restaurants against the MSC Currently recruiting for trainings Spring. that will begin 2 May and 5 June Responsibilities: Assist with Standard. Travel required. Located 2008. all duties associated with a throughout North America, with Contact: David Edick, Alaskan coldwater intensive culture trout emphasis on the U.S., particularly Observers, Inc., 130 Nickerson, hatchery including: spawning the West Coast, and Canada. Suite 206, Seattle, Washington fish, monitoring development Qualifications: B.S. or higher. of eggs and fry, developing and 98109; 800/483-7310; aoistaff@ QMS, ISO, HACCP, or similar implementing feeding schedules, alaskanobservers.com; www. experience. Fisheries experience alaskanobservers.com. administering chemical treatments for disease, monitoring water preferred. MRAG will provide auditor training on the MSC Natural Resources Biologist I, quality, maintaining hatchery Standard. Maryland Department of Natural production records, collecting Resources, Fisheries Service, and entering data and preparing Salary: Paid an agreed upon daily Annapolis. reports on hatchery operations, rate consistent with qualifications Responsibilities: Provides assisting in the supervision of the and the location of the work. technical and administrative hatchery staff, training workers 10–20 days of work per year per in fish husbandry techniques, support to Maryland's striped auditor. bass harvest monitoring program. and assisting other personnel as Closing date: 28 October 2008. Assist the current biologist in net needed with sampling and habitat inspections and certifications, improvement work. Contact: E-mail CV and cover tag distribution, and data Qualifications: B.S. in biology, letter to Jennie Harrington, jennie. management. Assist with the zoology, botany, or a related field, [email protected], distribution and collection or equivalent. www.mragamericas.com.

258 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g fish•ing track•le: [fish•ing track•uhl] Equipment, apparatus or gear for fish related field research projects. From tracking the location and depths of individual fish to collecting spawning and migratory data on juveniles and adults in rivers and lakes, no one offers you more freshwater fish knowledge than ATS.

TRANSMITTERS RECEIVERS GPS SYSTEMS ANTENNAS CODED ID SYSTEMS CONSULTING Advanced Telemetry Systems

WWW.ATSTRACK.COM MINNESOTA. 763-444-9267 [email protected] Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5• m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 259 Project Location: Wanapum Dam Grant County, WA U.S.A.

Hydroacoustic Technology, Inc.

260 Fisheries • v o l 33 n o 5 • m a y 2008 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g