Abundance of Endangered Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser Brevirostrum
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
198 National Marine Fisheries Service Fishery Bulletin First U.S. Commissioner established in 1881 of Fisheries and founder NOAA of Fishery Bulletin Abstract—Anthropogenic perturba- Abundance of endangered shortnose tions during the 19th and 20th cen- turies resulted in major declines in sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) in the abundance of populations of shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum). Altamaha River in Georgia Despite the designation of this spe- cies as endangered, most populations Evan C. Ingram (contact author) are still not recovering. Abundance Douglas L. Peterson (retired) monitoring is needed to identify fluc- tuations in recruitment and survival; Adam G. Fox however, river- specific assessments are deficient throughout the range of this Email address for contact author: [email protected] species. During the summer of 2011, we used anchored nets to fish a closed Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources population of shortnose sturgeon in University of Georgia the Altamaha River in Georgia. Mark- 180 East Green Street recapture tagging resulted in the cap- Athens, Georgia 30602 ture of 288 shortnose sturgeon (272 fish with unique marks and 16 fish Present address for contact author: School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences recaptured) over 11 weekly sampling Stony Brook University occasions. Estimates of the abundance Stony Brook, New York 11790 of shortnose sturgeon were derived by using Huggins closed- capture mod- els. The preferred model incorporated effects of temporal variation on weekly capture probability and estimated an abundance of 2218 individuals (95% The shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser bre- characterized by slow growth, delayed confidence interval [CI]: 1424–3350), virostrum) is an imperiled species that maturation, and longevity. Latitudinal including 725 (95% CI: 455–1192) juve- is widely distributed along the Atlantic differences in growth between river pop- niles and 1493 (95% CI: 954–2409) adults. Point estimates of group abun- seaboard of the United States (Vladykov ulations are well- documented, and the dance indicate that the population is and Greeley, 1963; Birstein, 1993; maximum age for southern populations dominated by adults, although dynamic Kynard, 1997; NMFS, 1998). Overfish- of shortnose sturgeon (i.e., population shifts in size structure following periods ing, pollution, and habitat fragmenta- segments south of Chesapeake Bay) has of high recruitment have been reported tion during the 19th and 20th centuries been reported as 20 years (Rogers and to occur. This study continued previous led to range- wide declines in abundance Weber1; Fleming et al., 2003), compared mark- recapture efforts in this river sys- and extirpations of populations of short- with the ages of northern populations tem, and its results offer further evi- nose sturgeon (Dadswell, 1979). In 1967, that may reach 70 years (Dadswell, dence that the Altamaha River supports the largest population of shortnose stur- this species was listed as endangered 1979). Likewise, although lengths at geon south of Chesapeake Bay. under the U.S. Endangered Species maturity of shortnose sturgeon are sim- Preservation Act (Federal Register, ilar throughout their range, increased 1967) and is currently protected under growth rates in southern river systems the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973. result in earlier ages at maturity and Shortnose sturgeon are listed as a single, truncated life histories (Dadswell, 1979; range- wide stock, and each riverine pop- Dadswell et al., 1984). Because of the ulation of this stock is separately man- difficulty of differentiating sex and aged; however, regulatory authorities maturity of fish in field conditions, a recognize 5 regional population clusters, criterion of 500 mm fork length (FL) is Manuscript submitted 9 March 2020. some of which may function as metapop- commonly used to assign maturity for Manuscript accepted 19 June 2020. ulations (SSSRT, 2010). Despite decades wild caught fish (Bain, 1997). Juveniles Fish. Bull. 118:198–204 (2020). Online publication date: 6 July 2020. of conservation efforts, the historical doi: 10.7755/FB.118.2.8 range of rivers occupied by this species 1 Rogers, S. G., and W. Weber. 1995. Move- is greatly reduced, and assessments that ments of shortnose sturgeon in the Alta- The views and opinions expressed or indicate recovery are rare (SSSRT, 2010; maha River System, Georgia, 78 p. Georgia implied in this article are those of the but see Bain et al., 2007). Dep. Nat. Resour., Brunswick, GA. [Avail- author (or authors) and do not necessarily able from Georgia Dep. Nat. Resour., 2 reflect the position of the National Management of shortnose sturgeon is Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. SE, Ste. 1252, Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. made difficult by a complex life history Atlanta, GA 30334.] Ingram et al.: Abundance of Acipenser brevirostrum in the Altamaha River in Georgia 199 National Marine and adults inhabit narrow reaches near the freshwater– as far as 60 rkm upstream from the mouth (Sheldon and Fisheries Service Fishery Bulletin First U.S. Commissioner saltwater interface of their natal rivers during the spring Alber, 2002). The main channel of the Altamaha River has established in 1881 of Fisheries and founder NOAA of Fishery Bulletin and summer months, dispersing upstream for spawning no impoundments below the fall line, allowing shortnose or foraging purposes during winter and early spring (Hall sturgeon to access a variety of habitats throughout their et al., 1991). Clinal differences in temperature and dis- life history. Although juveniles and spawning adults have charge gradients appear to be the main factors influenc- been documented near the confluence and in both tribu- ing river use and the timing of upstream dispersal (Hall taries of the Altamaha River, the Oconee and Ocmulgee et al., 1991; Rogers and Weber1; Kieffer and Kynard, 1996; Rivers, during the winter months, the estuary represents Ingram and Peterson, 2018). the primary habitat of shortnose sturgeon (Ingram and Current objectives for management of shortnose sturgeon Peterson, 2018). During summer, individuals are primar- are aimed at recovery of populations to minimum thresholds ily limited to deepwater areas of the main channel near of population size that would allow for eventual delisting the freshwater– saltwater interface (Rogers and Weber1; (NMFS, 1998). Because of the marked absence of historical Peterson and Bednarski, 2013; Ingram and Peterson, 2018). abundance data, research must prioritize efforts to define and evaluate listing criteria for contemporary populations. Capture and tagging The largest and best- studied populations of shortnose stur- geon occur in the Hudson River in New York (56,708 adults; All methods for the capture and handling of shortnose Bain et al., 2007) and in the Delaware River in Delaware and sturgeon in this study were performed in accordance with New Jersey (~13,000 adults; O’Herron et al., 1993). Assess- relevant guidelines and regulations and were authorized ments of this species are lacking for most rivers south of the by the National Marine Fisheries Service (endangered Chesapeake Bay; however, results of recent studies indicate species permit no. 16482), Georgia Department of Natu- that southern populations are particularly susceptible to ral Resources (scientific collecting permit no. 13791), and declines in abundance because of their accelerated life cycle University of Georgia Institutional Animal Care and Use and lower abundances (Peterson and Farrae, 2011; Peterson Committee (animal use protocol no. A2013 01-012-R1). and Bednarski, 2013; Bahr and Peterson, 2017). Therefore, From May through August 2011, shortnose stur- the systematic monitoring of southern populations may be geon were targeted in the Altamaha River estuary with particularly important to identify fluctuations in annual anchored monofilament gill nets and trammel nets. Nets recruitment or adult survival over multiple years. were deployed in the tidally influenced reach of the estu- In contrast to most large river systems along the Atlantic ary, with the majority of sampling effort occurring below coast, the Altamaha River, in Georgia, is a relatively the freshwater–saltwater interface (rkm 10–35). Clean- undisturbed habitat with one of the largest populations bottom sites for netting were identified from prior studies of shortnose sturgeon in the southeastern United States in the system (e.g., Peterson and Bednarski, 2013; Ingram (NMFS, 1998; SSSRT, 2010). As such, it provides a rare and Peterson, 2018) and were confirmed with sonar. All opportunity to study population dynamics of shortnose nets mea sured 91.4 m long and 3.1 m deep. Gill nets were sturgeon at the southern extent of the range of this spe- constructed of 3 randomly ordered 30.5-m panels of mono- cies. Monitoring of the population in the Altamaha River filament meshes with stretch measures of 7.6, 10.2, and from 2004 through 2010 identified shifts in size structure 15.3 cm. Trammel nets had an inner panel of 7.6- cm mesh that were characterized by variable abundance of juveniles surrounded by 2 outer panels of 30.5- cm mesh. Nets were and stable abundance of adults (Peterson and Bednarski, fished perpendicular to the river channel for 30–60 min 2013). Because southern populations may be particularly during slack tides to maximize capture efficiency and min- sensitive to point disturbances, continued assessments are imize gear damage. necessary to evaluate changes in annual recruitment