Vol 34 no 9 sePteMbeR 2009

Fish News legislative Update Journal Highlights Calendar FisheriesAmerican Fisheries Society • www.fi sheries.org Job center

Western Lake Trout Woes

Why Do People Drop Out of Recreational ? A Study of Lapsed Fishers from Queensland, Australia

AFS 140th Annual Meeting Pittsburgh 2010 Page 460

1st Call for Papers

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 417 Small Tag—Big Returns

Many species of aquatic organisms all around the world have been successfully tagged with Northwest Marine Technology’s Coded Wire Tags. Coded Wire Tags are pieces of stainless steel wire 1.1 mm long x 0.25 mm diameter with a numeric code printed on them (enlarged, left). Because they are so tiny, Coded Wire Tags can be implanted into very small with little effect on the host. Coded Wire Tags are unique in their nearly universal high retention rates, even through molts and metamorphosis. Retention for the life of the is the norm, and tags have been recovered 24 years after release. Hundreds of publications describing their use are available on our website.

In the Pacific Northwest of the United States and Canada, researchers and managers have been tagging wild and hatchery coho and Chinook salmon with Coded Wire Tags since 1968. This program is remarkable in the cooperation between government entities, its longevity, and the amount of data collected and shared.

The fish are tagged as juveniles (photo, center) before release from a hatchery or before outmigration from a river. The tags are recovered from returning adults in commercial and sport fisheries (photo, bottom), spawning grounds, and hatcheries at thousands of sites across six American states and one Canadian province, making this the biggest animal tagging program in history.

Researchers and fish managers have learned much about salmonid survival, contributions, hatchery practices, and a myriad of other subjects from this program. Please contact us if we can help with your tagging needs. This 55 pound, 5 year old Chinook salmon was Coded Wire Tagged as a smolt before release..

Northwest Marine Technology, Inc. Northwest Marine Technology, Inc. www.nmt.us Shaw Island, Washington, USA Corporate Office Biological Services

360.468.3375418 [email protected] 360.596.9400Fisheries [email protected] • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Vol 34 No 9 SePteMBer 2009 443 aMERICanFisheries 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 • main@fi sheries.org The American Fisheries Society (AFS), founded in 1870, is the oldest and largest professional society representing fi sheries scientists. The AFS promotes scientifi c research and enlightened management of aquatic resources for optimum use and enjoyment by the public. It also encourages comprehensive education of fi sheries scientists and continuing on-the-job training. 424 Dues and fees for 2009 are:

AFs oFFiceRs FISHERIES STAFF eDitoRs

PreSideNt SeNior editor SCieNCe editorS Donald C. Jackson Ghassan “Gus” N. Rassam Madeleine Hall-Arber Contents Ken ashley PreSideNt eleCt direCtor oF Doug Beard Wayne A. Hubert PUBliCAtioNS Ken Currens COLUMN: COLUMN: aaron lerner William E. Kelso FirSt Deirdre M. Kimball 420 PRESIDENT’S HOOK 453 DiRectoR’s line ViCe PreSideNt ManaGInG EDITOR Beth Beard Robert T. Lackey William L. Fisher dennis lassuy Merging our deeper Currents A Community of Professionals… Allen Rutherford SeCoNd ProdUCtioN editor A story about an early courtroom experience This year’s meeting will honor 25 and 50 year Cherie Worth ViCe PreSideNt BOOK REVIEW reveals the value of AFS membership as well as AFS members, who discuss what the Society John Boreman editorS Francis Juanes the values of AFS members. has meant to them over the decades. PASt PreSideNt Ben letcher William G. Franzin Keith Nislow Donald C. Jackson Gus Rassam

eXeCUtiVe direCtor ABStrACt trANSlAtioN Ghassan“Gus” N.Rassam Pablo del Monte Luna News: Letters: $76 in North America ($88 elsewhere) for regular members, 421 FISHERIEs 454 TO THE EDITOR $19 in North America ($22 elsewhere) for student members, does venting promote survival of and $38 ($44) retired members. Fees include $19 for Fisheries subscription. JOUrNAL HIGHLIGHts: released fi sh? Nonmember and library subscription rates are $132 ($127). 422 MARine AnD Price per copy: $3.50 member; $6 nonmember. the author responds— COASTAl FISHERIEs Fisheries (ISSN 0363-2415) is published monthly by the American Fisheries Society; 5410 Grosvenor Lane, 422 NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAl News: Suite 110; Bethesda, MD 20814-2199 ©copyright 2009. OF 456 AFS UNITs Periodicals postage paid at Bethesda, Maryland, and at an additional mailing offi ce. A copy of Fisheries Guide for Authors is available from the editor or the AFS website, UPDAte: OBItUArY: www.fi sheries.org. If requesting from the managing editor, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed envelope with 423 leGislAtion AnD PolicY 458 JAMES ARTHUR ROy HAMIlTOn your request. Republication or systematic or multiple Elden Hawkes, Jr. reproduction of material in this publication is permitted only under consent or license from the American Fisheries Society. AFs ANNUAL MeetING: Postmaster: Send address changes to Fisheries, American 460 1st cAll FoR PAPeRs Fisheries Society; 5410 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110; Bethesda, Feature: MD 20814-2199. 424 INtrODuCeD SPeCIeS Pittsburgh, 12–16 September 2010 Fisheries is printed on 10% post-consumer Western Lake trout Woes recycled paper with soy-based printing inks. The adverse impacts of introduced lake trout CALeNDAr: to food webs, native species and sport fi sheries 463 FISHERIES EVENTs has led managers to consider or implement strategies to reduce or control their numbers ANNOUNCeMeNts: advertising Index and predation. 464 Job centeR, Patrick J. Martinez, Patricia E. Bigelow, Advanced Telemetry Systems . . . . 467 Mark A. Deleray, Wade A. Fredenberg, Emperor Aquatics, Inc...... 423 Barry S. Hansen, Ned J. Horner, Stafford K. Lehr, Roger W. Schneidervin, floy Tag ...... 437 Scott A. Tolentino, and Art E. Viola Hallprint...... 458 Halltech Aquatic Research, Inc. . . . 439 Feature: 443 HuMaN DIMeNSIONS Hydroacoustic Technology, Inc. . . . 468 Why Do People Drop Out of recreational Lotek Wireless...... 465 Fishing? a Study of Lapsed Fishers from Queensland, australia CoVer: Gill nets can be deployed to be Northwest Marine Technology, Inc. . 418 Understanding the reasons why people drop highly effective in capturing lake trout with minimal by-catch of oregon rfId ...... 441 out of recreational fi shing and the constraints non-target species. These lake that prevent them from resuming their fi shing O. S. Systems ...... 421 trout were netted in Yellowstone participation can help develop strategies Lake, Wyoming as part of efforts to Sonotronics ...... 458 to deal with declining recreational fi shing suppress lake trout for the benefi t participation. of the food web and sport fi shery tell advertisers you found them through supported by Yellowstone cutthroat Fisheries! Stephen G. Sutton, Kara Dew, and trout. Jim Higgs Credit: Audrey Squires Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 419 COLUMN: Donald C. Jackson AFS President Jackson PRESIDENT’S HOOK may be contacted at: [email protected].

Merging Our Deeper Currents

About 20 years ago, when I was that as a professional, you “profess” people and I really didn’t expect to get an untenured assistant professor at to be. And then this evening, as you much response. Mississippi State University, one of lay in bed looking at the dark ceiling But the responses came—incredible my research associates said, “Don, before you sleep, ask yourself the real responses—in time for me to use one day you will be president of the questions—I don’t need to tell you them during my deposition and tes- American Fisheries Society.” I smiled what they are. Now, the story…. timony. I was floored by this profes- and brushed off the comment. I was Back when my research associate sional support from AFS colleagues. too busy to think about stuff like that, was engaged in her prophecies, I was These important people, esteemed as and besides, nobody ever plans to president of the Mississippi Chapter scientists and as “high ranking” mem- become AFS president. It’s just not and doing double duty as the chair of bers of AFS, had taken time to help done. But my associate was obviously the Southern Division’s Warmwater me, an unknown assistant professor at a prophet because here I am, begin- Stream Committee and as the editor a small land-grant university down in ning my term as your new president. of that committee’s Proceedings of Mississippi! I think it appropriate that I begin the First International Smallmouth Following my court testimony, my year as AFS president by sharing a Bass Symposium. I was also heavily the judge ordered a halt to chan- story with you. I am, after all, a native engaged with research and teach- nel dredging in the river and also of the Deep South, a region where ing responsibilities with about half a ordered a comprehensive evaluation storytelling is very much a part of my dozen graduate students. We were of floodplain rivers throughout the cultural heritage. That’s why we have doing everything we could to raise delta region of western Mississippi. front porches down here. And, being awareness regarding the incredible In the aftermath, there was a bio- a former seminarian and Protestant fisheries resources associated with political firestorm and attempts to minister prior to my Ph.D. in fisheries, Mississippi’s streams. The ink was get me removed from my faculty I learned well the power of storytell- still wet on my AFS certification as a position. One morning I was called ing—parables if you will. The purpose fisheries scientist. down to meet with the dean of my of my story is to help reinforce faith in I recently had been called to testify college, expecting the worst. However, what we do as fisheries professionals as an expert witness in Federal District he told me that the governor and as we reach out with our disciplines— the attorney general had intervened and our lives—to address opportuni- Court down in Jackson, Mississippi, and, as a result, my faculty position ties and challenges in natural resources regarding the influence of channel was secured. They’d stated that I’d arenas that within our individual dredging on fisheries associated with simply done my job. I’d conducted and professional expressions are often- one of Mississippi’s floodplain rivers, had presented science that had the times as much a matter of the heart the Yalobusha River. I had data that benefit of professional peer review. I’d as they are of the mind. This of course my students and I had collected (lots provided scientific testimony as well raises questions of identity, objectivity, of it) and I had analyzed that data as professional opinion in court at missions, goals, strategies, trust, hon- using very straight-forward statistical the request of the state and a federal esty, commitment, and determination, approaches. Prior to the court date, judge. They’d said that Mississippi for each of us individually as well as I’d sent the results of my research should not (and in this case would not) corporately in AFS. After reading this out for peer review among people I fire a scientist for doing his job. Shortly story, I encourage you to take a look knew by name only through reading at the new AFS Strategic Plan. Think AFS journals. Along with my science, thereafter, I was encouraged by AFS deeply about it, and challenge yourself I enclosed a cover letter explaining colleagues to publish part of this story to become integrated within it. There who I was, what I was doing, what (Jackson and Jackson 1989)…to go are wonderful opportunities outlined the issues were, and requesting the full distance professionally as a throughout this Strategic Plan for you professional scientific critique. From contributor to an AFS journal. to give yourself away for the things my perspective as a young scientist, that you care about, and for things these were “big name” and “famous” Continued on page 458

420 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g News: Fisheries Y avno

California Chinook fishery value Round gobies invade Great Lakes tributaries In a new economic report for the American Sportfishing In a recent article in the journal Biological Invasions, a team Association, Southwick Associates has calculated that a full of scientists from the University of Toronto, the Ontario Ministry recovery of California’s Central Valley Chinook salmon runs of Natural Resources, and the University of Guelph have could potentially provide $5.7 billion in new economic activity identified an invasion of round gobies into many Great Lakes for the state and the creation of 94,000 new jobs. The current tributaries, including several areas of the Thames, Sydenham, shutdown of the salmon fishery is costing California an esti- Ausable, and Grand rivers. A number of the affected areas are known as “species-at-risk” hot spots. Round gobies entered mated $1.4 billion in lost economic activity and 23,000 jobs in the St. Clair River in 1990 likely through ballast water from both the commercial and recreational saltwater fishing sectors. ocean-going ships. Despite over 15 years of potential invasion The California commercial and recreational saltwater fishing through natural dispersal from the Great Lakes into tributaries, seasons have been closed for the last two years in efforts to the round goby threat did not manifest itself until now. protect the remaining stocks. Historically California’s Central “It was previously thought that these high-diversity areas Valley was the second largest salmon producing river system in were immune to invasion. This study shows that this is likely the lower 48 states—second only to the Columbia River. The not the case,” said lead author Mark Poos of the University full report is available at www.asafishing.org. of Toronto. Of particular concern is the potential impact on endangered species such as the eastern sand darter and wavy Fisheries can be saved from collapse rayed lampmussel. The round goby, an aggressive ground- In the 31 July issue of Science, a group of researchers led by feeder, may also threaten three globally rare species: the rayed Boris Worm of Dalhousie University said that there is still hope bean, northern riffleshell, and snuffbox mussels. for saving the world’s fisheries from collapse – if a combination of traditional approaches is implemented, such as catch quotas and community management, along with additional measures, such as strategically placed fishing closures, gear restrictions, ocean zoning, and economic incentives. In a two-year project, the researchers studied the exploitation rates of various fish stocks at key fisheries in Europe, North America, and New Zealand, and found most were aimed at gaining the maximum sustainable yield—a goal that brings many fish stocks dan- gerously close to collapsing. Worm and his colleagues found that some of the world’s fisheries have already adjusted their exploitation rates, and are on their way to recovery. Efforts introduced to halt in 5 of the 10 large marine eco- systems they examined were showing signs of success. A com- bination of measures—such as catch quotas, no-take zones, and selective fishing gear—had helped fish stocks recover, they added. However, a large portion (at least 60%) of fish stocks worldwide still need help—and even lower exploitation rates are needed to reverse the collapse of some of these vulnerable species. The researchers recognize that rebuilding collapsing fish stocks will require sacrificing short-term yields (and income) for conservation benefits, or at the very least, targeting some recoverable fish species while protecting others. The authors O. S. Systems note that, unfortunately, most rebuilding efforts have only begun after there is overwhelming evidence of overexploita- tion, and Worm et al. insist that fisheries managers must take action before they reach that critical stage.

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 421 JOUrNAL HIGHLIGHts: JOUrNAL HIGHLIGHts: MARine AnD coAstAl NORTH AMERICAN FISHERIES JOURNAl OF AQUACUlTURE

VOLUMe 1 VOLUMe 71 IssUe 1 IssUe 3 IN PrOGress JULY 2009

allometric Growth in Hatchery-Reared Gilthead Seabream. Deniz Çoban, H. Okan Kamaci, Cüneyt Suzer, S,ahin Saka, and Kürs,at Firat, pages 189-196. Maturation of Little Skate and Winter Skate in the Survival, Growth, and Feed Utilization of Western atlantic from Cape Hatteras to Georges Bank. Pre- and Postmetamorphic american Shad Exposed to Increasing Michael G. Frisk and Thomas J. Miller, pages 1-11. Salinity. Yanju Jia, Qinghua Liu, Cheryl A. Goudie, and Bill A. Simco, pages 197-205. Relationships between Larval and Juvenile abundance [Technical Note] Survey of Ovaprim Use as a Spawning aid in of Winter-Spawned Fishes in north Carolina, USa. J. ornamental Fishes in the United States as Administered through Christopher Taylor, Warren A. Mitchell, Jeffrey A. Buckel, the University of Florida Tropical aquaculture Laboratory. Jeffrey Harvey J. Walsh, Kyle W. Shertzer, Gretchen Bath Martin, and E. Hill, Kathy Heym Kilgore, Deborah B. Pouder, James F. F. Powell, Jonathan A. Hare, pages 12-21. Craig A. Watson, and Roy P. E. Yanong, pages 206-209. Geometric Morphological Differences Distinguish Evaluation of Various Feeding Regimens in a Multiple-Batch Populations of Scup in the northwestern atlantic Ocean. Cropping System of Channel Catfi sh Production. Menghe H. li, Joseph W. Love and Peter D. Chase, pages 22-28. Edwin H. Robinson, Brian G. Bosworth, Daniel F. Oberle, and Penelope M. Lucas, pages 210-215. Analysis of a Stock–recruit relationship for red King Establishment of Mostly Male Groups of Bluegills by Grading Crab off Kodiak Island, alaska. William R. Bechtol and Selection and Evaluation of their Growth Performance. H. P. Gordon H. Kruse, pages 29-44. Wang, G. K. Wallat, R. S. Hayward, L. G. Tiu, P. O’Bryant, and D. Rapp, Morphological, Physiological, and Genetic Techniques pages 216-223. for improving Field identifi cation of Steelhead, Coastal Tank Culture of Sunshine Bass Fingerlings without Using Cutthroat Trout, and Hybrid Smolts. Benjamen M. Kennedy, Rotifers. Gerald M. Ludwig and Steve E. Lochmann, pages 224-228. Jason Baumsteiger, William L. Gale, William R. Ardren, and Toxicity of Common aquaculture Disinfectants to new Zealand Kenneth G. Ostrand, pages 45-56. Mud Snails and Mud Snail Toxicants to Rainbow Trout Eggs. Randall W. Oplinger and Eric J. Wagner, pages 229-237. Interannual Variability in Early Marine Growth, Size- Selective Mortality, and Marine Survival for Prince Use of Hydrogen Peroxide to Improve Golden Shiner Egg William Sound Pink Salmon. Alison D. Cross, David A. Hatchability. Jamie L. Bozwell, Richard D. Clayton, and Joseph E. Beauchamp, Jamal H. Moss, and Katherine W. Myers, pages Morris, pages 238-241. 57-70. Infl uence of Grow-Out Feed Fatty acid Composition on Finishing Success in nile Tilapia. Jesse T. Trushenski, John Boesenberg, and Site Fidelity and Movement Patterns of Groundfi sh Christopher C. Kohler, pages 242-251. associated with Offshore Petroleum Platforms in the [Technical Note] observations Concerning reproductive Santa Barbara Channel. Christopher G. Lowe, Kim M. temperature requirements of Captive lahontan Cutthroat Anthony, Erica T. Jarvis, Lyall F. Bellquist, and Milton S. Love, Trout. John P. Bigelow, Wendy M. Rauw, and Luis Gomez-Raya, pages pages 71-89. 252-255. temporal Shifts in demography and life History of an [Communication] The Effect of Water Temperature on Growth anadromous alewife Population in Connecticut. Justin P. and Survival of Largemouth Bass during Feed Training. Shawn Davis and Eric T. Schultz, pages 90-106. D. Coyle, Steven Patton, Kyle Schneider, and James H. Tidwell, pages 256-259. Linking “Sink or Swim” Indicators to Delayed Mortality in Red SnapperDo by youUsing awant Condition your Index. Sandrapaper L. to have[Communication] effect of temperature on larval Sunshine Bass Diamond and Matthew D. Campbell, pages 107-120. Growth and Survival to the Fingerling Stage. Gerald M. Ludwig worldwide access and visibility?and Steve E. Lochmann, pages 260-266. a Genetic assessment of Current Management Strategies Stress response and Posttransport Survival of Hybrid Striped for Spotted SubmitSeatrout in Texas. your Joel D.paper Anderson to and AFS’ William open-Bass Transported with or without Clove Oil. Todd D. Sink and J. J. Karel, pages 121-132. Wesley Neal, pages 267-275. Overwinteraccess, Growth andonline, Mortality international of Young-of-the-Year journal,The Effect of Hydrogen Peroxide on the Hatch Rate and Windowpanes: Cohort-specifi c Responses. Melissa J. Saprolegnia spp. Infestation of Channel Catfi sh Eggs. Andrew J. Neuman and KennethMarine W. Able, and pages 133-142.Coastal Fisheries. Mitchell, Andrew A. Radomski, David L. Straus, and Ray Carter, pages 276-280. Description and Initial Evaluation of a Text Message [Communication] Growth and Survival of Juvenile June Suckers Based reporting Method for Marine recreational in enclosures in Utah lake: Feasibility of Modifi ed Cage Culture anglers. M. Scott Baker Jr. and Ian Oeschger, pages 143-154. for an Endangered Species. Eric J. Billman and Mark C. Belk, pages www.fisheries.org/mcf 281-286.

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

422 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g UPDAte: Elden Hawkes, Jr. leGislAtion AnD PolicY aFS Policy Coordinator Hawkes can be contacted at ehawkes@fi sheries.org.

Cal-neva Chapter highlights salmonid issues new nOaa lobster rules In July the Conservation Committee of the California- NOAA announced fi nal measures to better protect the Nevada Chapter of AFS issued a draft list of issues that are larger American lobsters and breeding females that are affecting salmonid species in the region. Major California important for sustaining these populations. There are also and Nevada salmonid (and other fi sh species) issues include: new measures that will improve data collection in the fi shery • Blocked habitat, impacts on water quality and abun- and make state and federal lobster fi shing regulations more dance, and other consequences of dams and other fi sh migration barriers. consistent throughout lobster management areas, most of which include a combination of state and federal waters. • Inadequate fl ows caused by water extraction including diversions, groundwater extraction, and releases. The fi rst measure of the rule makes the federal maximum • Habitat degradation caused by mining, urbanization, pol- legal size rules consistent with the lobster fi shing rules for lution, and other causes. state waters. The second measure of the rule states that • Introduction and expansion of invasive, exotic species. the v-notch must be shallower than 1/8 inch in order to • Harmful effects of hatchery and captive breeding keep a v-notched lobster taken in any area other than the practices. Outer Cape Cod management area. The revisions to both • Deteriorated oceanic conditions and prey abundance/ maximum size and to the landing of v-notched animals are distribution. intended to allow additional opportunities for lobsters to • Anticipated negative impacts of climate change includ- produce young and help replenish the population. They will ing altered fl ow peaks, timing, and duration; snow pack also make state and federal requirements more consistent levels; and fl ooding. with each other. A third measure to the rule requires that all • Impacts of eastern Pacifi c Ocean salmonid aquaculture federal lobster dealers to submit weekly electronic reports practices. for all lobster they purchase from vessel owners with federal • Commercial, recreational, and tribal fi shing practices. permits. electronic reports for all lobster they purchase from • Direct, inadvertent mortality causes by instream practices. vessel owners with federal permits. It is hoped that by bringing these issues to the fore- front, public policy solutions will be explored and imple- mented in order to correct or to lesson the impact that these issues have on salmonids and other fi sh species.

eU to protect anchovy stocks The European Commission has adopted a proposal for a long-term plan to manage the anchovy stock in the Bay of Biscay. The aim of the plan is to maintain the anchovy stocks at a level that allows them to be exploited sustainably, while at the same time delivering stability and profi tability for the fi shing sector. The plan would call for the total allowable catch (TAC) and relevant quotas to be set in late June, just after the scientifi c advice on the state Emperor Aquatics, Inc. of the stock becomes available, so that fi shing activities properly can be planned properly by stakeholders. The plan moves anchovy stock management away from a short- term approach to a multi-annual approach which provides both greater stability for the industry and clear objectives in terms of sustainable fi shing levels.

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 423 Feature: Introduced Species S t a t e of Colorado.

Western Lake Trout Woes

Lake trout can provide a trophy component in coldwater fisheries. Governor Bill Ritter congratulates anglers who caught consecutive state record lake trout from Blue Mesa Reservoir, Colorado.

Patrick J. Martinez, Martinez is an aquatic researcher for the Colorado Division of Wildlife, Grand Junction, and he Patricia E. Bigelow, can be contacted at [email protected]. Bigelow is a fishery biologist at the Center for Resources, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. Mark A. Deleray, Deleray is a fishery biologist for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Kalispell.. Wade A. Fredenberg, Fredenberg is a fishery biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Kalispell, Montana. Barry S. Hansen, Hansen is a fishery biologist for the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, Pablo, Montana. Ned J. Horner, Horner retired as the regional fishery manager for Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Coeur d’Alene. Stafford K. Lehr, Lehr is a senior fishery supervisor with California Department of Fish and Game, Rancho Cordova. Roger W. Schneidervin, Schneidervin is a regional fishery manager and Tolentino is a fishery project leader for Utah Scott A. Tolentino, and Division of Wildlife Resources, Vernal and Garden City, respectively. Art E. Viola Viola is a fishery biologist for Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wenatchee.

ABSTRACT: In the western United States, the ability of non-native lake trout INTRODUCTION (Salvelinus namaycush) to attain large sizes, > 18 kg under favorable conditions, fueled the popularity of lake trout fisheries. In the past, restrictive regulations were adopted Lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush), to increase lake trout abundance and produce trophy specimens. More recently, lake or mackinaw, have been widely intro- trout have become increasingly problematic because they prey upon and potentially duced outside of their native range compete with native and sport fishes. We review the experiences of agencies in seven into lakes and reservoirs in the west- western states which are considering or implementing strategies to address lake trout ern United States (Crossman 1995). In impacts despite management difficulties due to mixed public perception about lake their native range in North America, trout’s complex interactions with native or introduced fauna. Special regulations including northern Canada, Alaska, protecting lake trout have often been liberalized or rescinded to encourage their harvest and reduce their negative effects. More intensive methods to control or reduce the Great Lakes, and parts of New lake trout abundance include promoting or requiring lake trout harvest, commercial- England, lake trout fill an important scale netting, disrupting spawning, and stocking sterile lake trout. ecological niche as a keystone preda- tor in food webs of lakes (Ryder et al. Penurias con la trucha de lago 1981) and support socially and eco- nomically valuable recreational, com- Resumen: En el oeste de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica la capacidad de la mercial, or subsistence fisheries (Healy trucha de lago, especie foránea (Salvelinus namaycush), de alcanzar grandes tamaños, > 18 1978; Sellers et al. 1998; Mackenzie- kg bajo condiciones favorables, impulsó su popularidad en las pesquerías. En el pasado se Grieve and Post 2005). for adoptaron medidas restrictivas para incrementar la abundancia de la especie y producir native lake trout is often strictly regu- especímenes de trofeo. Más recientemente, la trucha de lago se ha convertido en un lated to enhance reproduction and to problema creciente ya que depredan y potencialmente compiten con especies nativas y perpetuate trophy-sized individuals de pesca recreativa. Se hace una revisión de las experiencias por parte de las agencias en siete estados del oeste que están considerando o implementando estrategias para lidiar (Payne et al. 1990; Dextrase and Ball con los impactos de la trucha de lago, a pesar de las dificultades de manejo debidas a 1991; Trippel 1993). In contrast, lake la mezcla de percepciones por parte del público acerca de las complejas interacciones trout add a trophy component in many de esta especie con la fauna nativa o introducida. Las regulaciones que protegen a la waters where they have been intro- trucha de lago se han decretado o revocado para fomentar su captura y reducir sus efectos duced, but they have often become negativos. Métodos más intensivos para controlar o reducir la abundancia de la trucha problematic predators on and poten- de lago incluyen la promoción o requerimiento de captura de la especie, el uso de redes a tial competitors with native fishes and escala comercial, interrupción del desove y producción de individuos estériles. other popular sport fishes.

424 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Ned Hor n er

Commercial fishery consultants from Hickey Brothers, LLC (Baileys Harbor, Wisconsin), and Idaho Department of Fish and Game personnel lift deepwater trap nets deployed to capture lake trout in Lake Pend Oreille, Idaho.

Lake trout are adapted to deep, cold oligotrophic lakes where Figure 1. Lakes (solid dots) and reservoirs (open circles) in the western U.S. with management issues concerning introduced lake trout. Waters their life history is characterized by longevity, slow growth, late marked with an “x” indicate the presence of non-native Mysis relicta. maturity, low reproductive potential, and slow replacement of adults (Shuter et al. 1998). Despite their restrictive habi- tat requirements and long generation time, lake trout often become the dominant top predator and reach large sizes in many unproductive northern waters due to the availability of sympatric prey such as opossum shrimp (Mysis relicta) and lake whitefish ( clupeaformis; Scott and Crossman 1973; Johnson 1976). Among North American salmonids, lake trout are second in size only to Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawystcha; Donald and Alger 1986). The largest recorded lake trout was just over 45 kg and 127 cm total length (TL; Scott and Crossman 1973). The species commonly exceeds 18 kg under favorable conditions (Donald and Alger 1986). Its large size often exceeds that of other sport fish, both native and non-native, earning it the devotion of some anglers who demand that it be maintained or maximized in western fish- eries despite demonstrable depletions of its prey (Yule and Luecke 1993; Johnson and Martinez 2000; Beauchamp et al. 2007). Herein, we review lake trout management and impacts on local resources in 18 western lakes and reservoirs.

BIOLOGICAL AND MANAGEMENT ATTRIBUTES OF LAKE TROUT IN THE WEST

Fifteen lakes and three reservoirs are included in this review of lake trout in the western United States (Figure 1). These

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 425 B ri an F rede n berg S c ott T ole n ti o

Lake trout are highly resistant to starvation. This emaciated 96.5 cm TL, Triploid lake trout produced at the Grace State Fish Hatchery, Idaho,

7.7 kg (Wr = 60) lake trout was caught nearly a decade after kokanee for stocking into Bear Lake, Utah-Idaho. Double fin clips, adipose and were eliminated as its primary food source. right pelvic, are applied prior to stocking to facilitate evaluating the performance of triploid lake trout in the fishery.

waters vary greatly in size, depth, and alti- Table 1. Physical attributes of lake trout waters in the western United States. State(s) in which the water is tude (Table 1). Waters located is shown in parentheses. that span the bound- ary between two states include Lake Water Surface area (ha) Elevation (m) Mean depth (m) Maximum depth (m)

Tahoe, Flaming Gorge Tahoe (CA/NV) 49,491 1,900 305 501 Reservoir, and Bear Fallen Leaf (CA) 567 1,953 53 120 Lake. Six lakes lie within Blue Mesa (CO) 3,709 2,293 31 104 national parks: Jackson, Granby (CO) 2,939 2,525 23 67 Yellowstone, Bowman, Pend Oreille (ID) 34,814 629 164 351 Priest (ID) 9,461 743 38 112 Kintla, Logging, and Upper Priest (ID) 541 743 13 32 McDonald. Nine waters Flathead (MT) 49,854 881 47 118 contain non-native M. Bowman (MT) 691 1,229 Unknown 77 relicta: Tahoe, Fallen Kintla (MT) 688 1,222 Unknown 119 Logging (MT) 444 1,162 Unknown 60 Leaf, Granby, Pend McDonald (MT) 2,763 961 Unknown 142 Oreille, Priest, Upper Swan (MT) 1,312 935 16 43 Priest, Flathead, Swan, Chelan (WA) 13,500 335 144 453 and Chelan (Figure 1). Bear (UT/ID) 28,350 1,806 28 63 Many of these waters, Flaming Gorge (UT/WY) 17,018 1,843 64 133 Jackson (WY) 10,420 2,062 37 136 including Blue Mesa Yellowstone (WY) 35,427 2,359 48 133 Reservoir, are leading destinations for lake trout anglers in the western United States Table 2. Lengths and weights of state record lake trout caught by angling in selected waters of the western and have produced United States.

state record lake trout (Table 2). State Water Year Record lake trout size In the 1980s and Length (cm) Weight (kg) early 1990s, restrictive regulations were used to California Tahoe 1974 NA 16.9 Colorado Blue Mesa 2007 112 22.8 enhance angling oppor- Granby 1995 100 17.4 tunities for trophy-sized Idaho Pend Oreille 1995 NA 19.7 lake trout in several Priest 1971 125 26.1 western states (Table 3; Montana Flathead 2004 108 19.2 Utah Flaming Gorge 1988 115 23.4 Johnson and Martinez Washington Chelan 2001 NA 16.1 1995), but this focus on Wyoming Flaming Gorge 1995 122 22.7 trophy fisheries in some Jackson 1983 117 22.7 waters initially failed to

426 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g consider the massive prey demand by lake trout. Likewise, other eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), and osprey (Pandion haliaetus), ecological and economic consequences of stockpiling even mod- could be vulnerable to direct or indirect effects of excessive est numbers of large, piscivorous lake trout were not adequately lake trout predation on other fishes in waters of the western scrutinized (Johnson and Martinez 1995, 2000). United States (Spencer et al. 1991; Schullery and Varley 1995; Lake trout grow more rapidly and achieve higher densi- Table 4). In some waters the preservation, recovery, or restora- ties in more productive waters with extended growing seasons tion of five subspecies of native cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus( (Johnson and Martinez 2000). Protective length limits that clarkii subspp.) may be in jeopardy due in part to excessive lake increase the abundance and sizes of lake trout can hasten or trout predation (Quist and Hubert 2004; Ruzycki 2004). Bull exacerbate the demise of prey populations, including fish not trout (Salvelinus confluentus), which are listed as threatened necessarily intended to feed lake trout (Luecke et al.1994; under the Endangered Species Act, appear to be especially Johnson and Martinez 1995). In the western United States, for vulnerable. Lake trout not only prey on bull trout but also example, prey populations exploited by lake trout invariably compete with them, and due to a shorter lifespan and more include sport fish stocked from hatcheries (Fredenberg et al. rigorous spawning and rearing requirements, bull trout are 1999; Johnson and Martinez 2000; Haddix and Budy 2005). at a considerable disadvantage when the two species are in Further, larger lake trout can consume fusiform prey up to 50% sympatry (Donald and Alger 1993; USFWS 1998; Fredenberg of their own body length (Keeley and Grant 2001; Ruzycki 2002). et al. 2003; Beauchamp et al. 2007) and thus are capable of consuming adults of other lacustrine salmonids. This may be California especially problematic if the accumulation of larger, piscivo- rous lake trout results from rapid growth, low exploitation, or Tahoe and Fallen Leaf lakes contain a variety of intro- protective length limits. Predation by lake trout can be con- duced salmonids and M. relicta. The potential reestablishment siderable even if their abundance is not enhanced by stock- of native Lahontan cutthroat trout (O. clarkii henshawi) is a ing, restrictive bag limits, or protective length limits. Lake recent management consideration for both waters and a poten- trout that grow more slowly and exist at lower densities in less tial challenge for managing multiple species. productive waters can still exert considerable predation. Lake trout exhibiting slow growth consume more prey to reach the Lake Tahoe same size as lake trout in more productive waters due to lower growth efficiencies (Johnson and Martinez 2000). Lake trout were introduced into Lake Tahoe in the late These characteristics of lake trout populations and the pre- 1880s (Frantz and Cordone 1970) and have been a component dation they exert can complicate management of other taxa in the fishery for nearly 100 years (Beauchamp et al. 1992). at an ecosystem level as well. A variety of fish species and ter- Lake trout predation in Lake Tahoe may have been respon- restrial vertebrates, including grizzly bear (Ursus arctos), bald sible for substantial reductions in native fishes and fluctuations

Table 3. Comparison of lake trout bag (K = must-kill) and length limits (M = minimum; X = maximum; slot limit range denoted by hyphen) in 18 waters in the western United States since 1980, showing prevailing regulations during 5-year intervals, including current lake trout regulations. Minimum length limits allow harvest of only one or two fish longer than the designated length; slot limits estrictr harvest to only one fish longer than the upper length. TH = Lake Tahoe and FL = Fallen Leaf Lake (California-Nevada); BM = Blue Mesa Reservoir and GR = Granby Reservoir (Colorado); PO = Lake Pend Oreille, PR = Priest Lake, and UP = Upper Priest Lake (Idaho); FH = Flathead Lake, GP = Glacier National Park which includes Bowman, Kintla, Logging, and McDonald lakes, and SW = Swan Lake (Montana); BR = Bear Lake (Utah-Idaho); FG = Flaming Gorge Reservoir (Utah- Wyoming); CH = Lake Chelan (Washington); and JK = Jackson Lake and YS = Yellowstone Lake (Wyoming). Prior to their discovery in Yellowstone Lake in 1994, lake trout inadvertently fell under the lake’s two trout < 33 cm maximum length limit.

Water Bag limit (N = none) Length limit in cm (N = none)

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 current 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 current

TH 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 N N N N N N N FL 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 N N N N N N N BM 2 1 1 8 8 8 8 N 51–M 56–86 N N N N GR 2 1 1 4 2 4 4 N 51–76 66–91 66–91 66–91 51–M N PO 6 6 2 4 N N N 41-M 41–M N N N N N PR 6 6 2 3 6 6 6 41-M 41–M N 66–81 N N N UP 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 N N N N N N N FH 5 5 10 10 16 20 50 N 71–M 66–91 76–91 76–91 76–91 76–91 GL 2 2 2 2 15 15 N N N N N N N N SW 5 5 10 10 10 10 10 N N N N N N N BR 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 N N N N N N N FG 2 2 2 2 3 6 8 N 51–M 66–91 86-M 71–M 71–M 71–M CH 2 2 2 2 2 2 N 38-M 38–M 38–M 38–M 38–M 38–M N JK 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 61-M 61–M 61–M 61–M 61–M 61–M 61–M YS 2 2 2 K K K K 33-X 33–X 33–X N N N N

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 427 Table 4. Fish and wildlife species impacted by lake trout that were purposefully introduced (standard font), entered from other waters (bold), or were illegally transplanted (bold italics) in 18 waters in the western United States. Waters: TH = Tahoe; FL = Fallen Leaf; BM = Blue Mesa; GR = Granby; PO = Pend Oreille; PR = Priest; UP = Upper Priest; FH = Flathead; GL = Glacier National Park; SW = Swan; BR = Bear; FG = Flaming Gorge; CH = Chelan; JK = Jackson; and YS = Yellowstone. Glacier National Park includes four lakes: Bowman, Kintla, Logging, and McDonald. NA = not applicable.

CA CO ID MT UT WA WY Species TH FL BM GR PO PR UP fH GL SW BR FG CH JK YS

Native cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii subspp.)

Bonneville O. c. utah NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X NA NA NA NA Lahontan O. c. henshawi X X NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Snake River O. c. bouvieri spp. NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X NA Westslope O. c. lewisi NA NA NA NA X X X X X X NA NA X NA NA Yellowstone O. c. bouveri NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X

Other native vertebrates

Bull trout Salvelinus confluentus NA NA NA NA X X X X X X NA NA X NA NA Whitefishes ( spp.) NA X NA NA X X X X X X X NA X X NA Catostomids, cyprinids or cottids X NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X NA NA NA NA Grizzly bear Ursus arctos NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X NA NA NA NA NA X Osprey Pandion haliaetus NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X

Non-native sport fish (Oncorhynchus spp.)

Kokanee O. nerka X NA X X X X X X X X NA X X NA NA Rainbow trout O. mykiss NA NA X X X NA NA NA NA NA NA X X NA NA in the abundance of introduced kokanee (O. nerka; Theide ests (Vander Zanden et al. 2003). Further, Daphnia, a key prey 1997). Native Lahontan cutthroat trout were extirpated from of Lahontan cutthroat trout, continue to be suppressed by M. the lake in the late 1930s due to a combination of factors relicta and reducing the abundance of M. relicta is not currently including introduced salmonids (Gerstung 1988), particu- feasible (Vander Zanden et al. 2003). larly lake trout (Vander Zanden et al. 2003). The combined effects of lake trout and M. relicta, first introduced in the early Fallen Leaf Lake 1960s (Richards et al. 1975), restructured the pelagic food web (Richards et al. 1991). Further, the diel vertical behavior of Fallen Leaf Lake also has been studied to assess the poten- M. relicta may have redistributed epilimnetic nutrients to the tial for reintroduction of Lahontan cutthroat trout (Allen et al. hypolimnion (Jassby et al. 1992; Jassby 1998). The establish- 2006). Despite the presence of several non-native aquatic spe- ment of M. relicta coincided with the disappearance of Daphnia cies, its food web remains comparatively more intact (Vander and Bosmina, but as M. relicta densities declined, cladocerans reappeared (Richards et al. 1991). Self-sustaining lake trout, Zanden et al. 2006). Lake trout were found to consume primar- the primary sport fish in Lake Tahoe, prey most heavily on ily Lahontan cutthroat trout, mountain whitefish (Prosopium M. relicta (Theide 1997). Lake trout also eat kokanee and williamsoni), and smaller lake trout. While larger lake trout native fishes such as Paiute sculpin (Cottus beldingi), Lahontan displayed increased piscivory and consumption of Lahontan redsides (Richardsonius egregious), Tui chub (Gila bicolor), and cutthroat trout, smaller lake trout (< 425 mm) represented Tahoe sucker (Catostomus tahoensis; Frantz and Cordone 1970; the greatest predation threat to salmonids due to their high Thiede 1997). abundance (Al-Chokhachy et al., in press). Other nonnative These changes in food web dynamics illustrate the com- species pose competitive (M. relicta and kokanee), predatory plexity of this system and now complicate the multiple fishery (brown trout Salmo trutta) or hybridization (rainbow trout O. management objectives for the lake. Richards et al. (1991) mykiss) threats to reintroduced Lahontan cutthroat trout, but reported that some fishery managers believed that a decline lake trout represent the critical limiting factor for juvenile in the number of larger lake trout warranted stricter lake trout Lahontan cutthroat trout. An epilimnetic thermal refuge pro- regulations. More recently, however, the feasibility of rein- tects Lahontan cutthroat trout from lake trout predation dur- troducing Lahontan cutthroat trout has been explored, but food web alterations (Vander Zanden et al. 2006) and social ing periods of stratification; however, lake trout continue to obstacles may limit the restoration potential of Lahontan cut- impede the reestablishment of Lahontan cutthroat trout due to throat trout in Lake Tahoe. Lake trout currently occupy the the spatial overlap of these species during the remainder of the historic niche of Lahontan cutthroat trout, and the lake trout year. Among the proposed strategies to reintroduce Lahontan reductions needed to restore Lahontan cutthroat trout would cutthroat trout into Fallen Leaf Lake is the active removal of be poorly received by anglers and associated commercial inter- lake trout (Al-Chokhachy et al., in press).

428 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g COLOraDO Mesa Reservoir exhibit rapid growth, reaching 76 cm TL within 10 years (Figure 2), and in recent years, the reservoir Lake trout concerns in Blue Mesa and Granby reservoirs do has produced several consecutive state records for lake trout not involve native fi shes. The issues in these reservoirs concern (Crockett et al. 2006; Table 2). However, creel survey data over the impact of lake trout predation on the stability and quality the past decade indicate that the kokanee fi shery attracts the of fi sheries for multiple, introduced species. Both reservoirs most anglers and supplies the most fi sh (Dan Brauch, Colorado also contain introduced kokanee, rainbow trout, and brown Division of Wildlife [CDoW], unpublished data). trout, and both have lost some fi shing opportunities as lake Correlations in the declines of kokanee and rainbow trout trout predation increased (Johnson and Martinez 2000). These with lake trout predation indicate that these main prey items of losses include reductions in the kokanee bag limit at Granby lake trout in Blue Mesa are in serious trouble (CDoW 2009). and fi shing opportunities for mature kokanee in spawning runs. The kokanee population was in decline in the early-1990s of greatest importance, however, is the annual collection of before the slot-limit protecting large lake trout was rescinded kokanee eggs from these reservoirs for restocking kokanee (Table 3). In ensuing years, kokanee and rainbow trout were populations (Martinez 2005). In any given year, either Blue found in equal proportions in the lake trout diet, and predation Mesa or Granby are the leading suppliers of kokanee eggs in also led to steep declines in the rainbow trout fi shery (Johnson the state, making their annual production of eggs essential for and Martinez 2000; Martinez 2005). Creel and sonar surveys producing kokanee fry (Martinez 2005). demonstrated that the kokanee population in Blue Mesa has not rebounded to desired levels despite increasing the annual Blue Mesa Reservoir stocking rate from 1.2 million fry to 2.8 million fry (Martinez

2005). Average relative weights (Wr) of large lake trout Blue Mesa Reservoir is highly productive and supports very (Hubert et al. 1994) in the reservoir, which had been high in high growth rates for kokanee and lake trout (Johnson and the past (110-150), showed some decline for fi sh > 70 cm TL Martinez 2000; Hardiman et al. 2004). Lake trout in Blue in 2006 (Dan Brauch, CDoW, unpublished data). These fi nd-

Figure 2. Growth rates of introduced lake trout in lakes and reservoirs of the western United States compared to that of lake trout populations exhibiting slow growth in lakes in northern British Columbia (BC; deLeeuw 1991). Lake Tahoe (TH), California-Nevada (Thiede 1997); Fallen Leaf Lake (FL), California (Allen et al. 2006); Blue Mesa Reservoir (BM), Colorado (Martinez 2004); Flaming Gorge Reservoir (FG), Utah-Wyoming (Luecke et al. 1994); Lake Pend Oreille (PO), Idaho (Hansen 2007); Bear Lake (BR), Utah-Idaho (Ruzycki et al. 2001); Yellowstone Lake (YS), Wyoming (Ruzycki et al. 2003); Flathead Lake (FH), Montana, (Beauchamp 1996); Jackson Lake (JK), Wyoming (Rhea 2007); Lake McDonald (MD), Montana (Dux 2005); Lake Chelan (CH), Washington (Shoen 2007). Fork length (FL) was converted to total length (TL) by TL=1.023 + (1.045 FL) for fi sh < 68 cm, and TL = 1.488 + (1.032 FL) for fi sh > 68 cm (Conrad and Gutmann 1996).

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 429 ings heightened concern for the overall fishery, particularly for native bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout (O. clarkii kokanee which may now also face predation and competition lewisi) are presently protected by harvest closures. These lakes from illegally introduced yellow perch (Perca flavescens). also contain native mountain whitefish and pygmy whitefish (P. coulteri), but only Lake Pend Oreille contains introduced Granby Reservoir lake whitefish. Kokanee, present in all three lakes, declined dramatically in Pend Oreille and Priest lakes, despite efforts Granby Reservoir formerly had a large kokanee population to restock them (IDFG 2007). M. relicta is established in the that supported a popular fishery and a spawning run that sup- three lakes and is believed to enhance lake trout recruitment plied several million eggs annually (Martinez and Bergersen (Mauser et al. 1988; Bowles et al. 1991; IDFG 2007). Fish 1991; Martinez and Wiltzius 1995). Martinez and Bergersen managers are seeking to minimize the lake trout populations (1991) indicated that while M. relicta (established by the in Pend Oreille and Upper Priest lakes, while accepting that late-1970s) predation on Daphnia diminished conditions for a lake trout fishery may be the most practical management kokanee, kokanee could persist in the reservoir. However, a option for Priest Lake. shift in the mid-1980s to management that emphasized lake trout was associated with a severe decline in the kokanee fish- Lake Pend Oreille ery by the early 1990s and ultimately the loss of kokanee egg production in 1998. Lake trout were introduced into Lake Pend Oreille in 1925, The virtual elimination of kokanee in Granby Reservoir but contributed little to the sport fishery until the mid-1990s. by the late 1990s was likely due to the combined effects of The lake supports one of the most abundant adfluvial bull trout M. relicta and lake trout. Kokanee were strongly influenced populations in the Pacific Northwest and a remnant popula- by cyclic trends in reservoir storage which influenced the cre- tion of westslope cutthroat trout. Kokanee were established ation of a thermal refuge for Daphnia that excluded M. relicta in the lake by the mid-1930s and supported a sport and com- from the warm surface waters (Martinez and Wiltzius 1995). mercial fishery catch that averaged one million fish per year Daphnia and kokanee benefited from warmer thermal condi- through the 1960s. Kokanee were also the primary prey of bull tions during years of reservoir drawdown, but M. relicta and trout, lake trout, and rainbow trout in the lake (Vidergar 2000; lake trout were favored during years when higher reservoir lev- Maiolie et al. 2002; Clarke et al. 2005). Gerrard (Kamloops) els associated with cooler thermal conditions allowed greater rainbow trout were introduced in 1941, producing a popular access to their prey. In the mid-1990s when the reservoir was sport fishery. The kokanee population began to decline in the near capacity, M. relicta density peaked at about 1,300/m2 and mid-1960s and reached extremely low levels by 2000 (Maiolie Daphnia were severely reduced (Martinez 2005). During this et al. 2002). Several factors have contributed to reduced period of depleted food resources for kokanee, lake trout stock- kokanee abundance and slowed their recovery including alter- ing and the protection afforded by a slot length-limit con- ation of the zooplankton community by introduced M. relicta tributed to an overabundance of lake trout (Martinez 2005). (Clarke et al. 2005), changes in lake level management that Further, consumption of M. relicta by lake trout, particularly altered shoreline spawning habitat (Maiolie et al. 2002), and juveniles (Johnson and Martinez 2000; Johnson et al. 2002), more recently and most importantly, excessive predation by likely enhanced the recruitment of lake trout. both rainbow trout and lake trout. Excessive lake trout predation in Granby Reservoir, which The abundance of immature and mature lake trout in Lake suppressed the kokanee population and eventually caused lake Pend Oreille in 1999, 2003, and 2005, described by an expo- trout relative weights to plummet by the mid-1990s, led to nential growth model, was projected to double every 1.4 years, removal of the slot length-limit by 2001 (Table 3). Lake trout reaching nearly 400,000 by 2010 if the population did not growth eventually stalled, toppling the reservoir’s reputation reach carrying capacity sooner (Hansen et al. 2008). Aggressive as a producer of trophy lake trout. Some lake trout recaptured action began in 2006 to curb the expanding lake trout popula- 10 years after tagging had grown less than 2.5 cm, with most tion to prevent a complete collapse of the kokanee population fish over 50.8 cm TL showing minimal or no increase in length and negative impacts to bull trout. Fishery managers experi- after several years (Martinez 2005, 2006). This poor growth and mented with a variety of harvest options to reduce the number the emaciated condition of lake trout resulted in the removal of lake trout in the lake. Approved in 2003, 10 licenses for a of all length-limits for lake trout in Granby Reservoir in 2006 commercial rod-and-reel fishery for lake trout were issued in (Table 3). Recent data suggest that the removal of protective the first year. Strict Food and Drug Administration require- length limits for lake trout has helped reduce predation by lake ments for fish handling and processing and a limited market for trout, facilitating recovery of the kokanee population and its lake trout subsequently limited participation to 3–4 licenses egg production, and restoring normal growth and condition of per year and a total commercial harvest since its inception of lake trout (Billy Atkinson, CDOW, pers. comm.). less than 2,000 lake trout. In 2006, sport anglers paid to har- vest rainbow trout and lake trout removed nearly 6,000 rain- Idaho bow trout and over 11,000 lake trout (Hansen et al. 2006) at a cost of about $241,000. A $10 bounty per fish proved more Pend Oreille and Priest lakes have similar management effective than rewards based on tagged fish ($100-$2,000), issues of lake trout negatively impacting both sport and native lottery tickets, or monthly cash drawings. The bounty was fish, while impacts to native fishes are the primary concern in increased to $15 per fish in 2007 with $500,000 budgeted Upper Priest Lake. At all three lakes, regulations limiting the annually for the program (Ned Horner, personal observation). harvest of lake trout have been liberalized (Table 3), while Through 2008, anglers participating in these harvest incentive

430 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g programs removed 18,784 rainbow trout and 41,726 lake trout ultimately led to the collapse of kokanee by 1976 (Bowles et (Jim Fredericks, Idaho Department of Fish and Game [IDFG], al. 1991). Priest Lake produced the U.S. angling record for pers. comm). lake trout outside of the Great Lakes (Table 2), but the loss Commercial trap netting gear for suppressing lake trout in of kokanee ended the lake’s reputation as a premier producer Lake Pend Oreille was evaluated and utilized by IDFG person- of trophy lake trout. The fishery is now dominated by lake nel and commercial fishery consultants (Peterson and Maiolie trout averaging 50 cm and 0.5 kg (Mark Liter, IDFG, unpub- 2005). In 2005, deep-water trap netting and intensive, targeted lished data). Bull trout formerly supported a productive fishery gill netting harvested another 5,015 lake trout, contributing in Priest Lake, but they were nearly extirpated from the lake to an exploitation rate of 44% and a total annual mortality by the late 1990s due to competition with lake trout (Venard of 58% (Hansen et al. 2008). By August 2007, an exploita- and Scarnecchia 2005). Lake trout regulations were liberal- tion rate of 57% and an estimated total annual mortality of ized in 2002 to reduce impacts on native fishes (IDFG 2007). 81% were achieved (Ned Horner, unpublished data). Through 2008, netting had removed a total of 21,871 lake trout for a However, given the combined effects of M. relicta and lake combined total of 63,597 lake trout being removed by netting trout, and other habitat and biological factors limiting recov- and angling. Modeling predicted that this use of multiple gear ery of bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout, Priest Lake will types (angling, trap nets, and gill nets) would be more effective continue to be managed primarily as a sport fishery for lake in collapsing the lake trout population in Lake Pend Oreille trout (IDFG 2007). than any one gear type alone (Hansen et al. 2008). Lake trout populations elsewhere were reportedly unable to withstand Upper Priest Lake total annual mortality higher than 50% (Healy et al. 1978; Hansen 2007). Total annual mortality of lake trout in Lake In contrast to Priest Lake, the management of Upper Priest Superior ranged from 50% just before and up to 90% during Lake will emphasize the protection and restoration of native their collapse (Hansen et al. 1995). If this high mortality could fishes, including the suppression of lake trout. Lake trout were be sustained, the lake trout population in Lake Pend Oreille first detected in Upper Priest Lake in the mid-1980s, invading should collapse. Kokanee in Lake Pend Oreille appeared to upstream from Priest Lake via a 3.2 km long channel (IDFG be responding to the reduction of lake trout. Survival of age 2007). Intensive annual gillnetting by agency personnel since 1 to age 2 kokanee increased from 10% in 2007 to 30% in 1998 and by commercial fishery consultants since 2007 (Table 2008. Similarly, survival of age 2 and age 3 kokanee increased 5) has been attempted to prevent lake trout from proliferating from 4% in 2007 to 51% in 2008 (Jim Fredericks, IDFG, pers. in Upper Priest Lake (Dupont et al. 2004; Dupont et al. in comm.). press), but re-invasion of lake trout from the large population in Priest Lake remains problematic. Movement of lake trout Priest Lake through the channel connecting the two lakes occurs primar- Lake trout were also introduced into Priest Lake in 1925 ily at night, and is restricted by warm water temperatures (over o and have created similar management challenges for sport 15 C) in July and August (Venard and Scarnecchia 2005). and native fish. The lake trout fishery was dominated by rel- Installation of a behavioral barrier (strobe light; Liter and atively few large fish until M. relicta was established by the Maiolie 2003) or trap netting in the channel between Priest early 1970s. M. relicta increased lake trout recruitment, result- and Upper Priest lakes are being considered to control lake ing in an increase in lake trout abundance and predation that trout movement during part of the year (IDFG 2007).

Table 5. Methods used to reduce or control lake trout abundance in 17 waters in the western United States. Numbers denote the year that a lake trout control strategy was first implemented. Question marks indicate control strategies that have been proposed or are being considered. FL = Fallen Leaf; BM = Blue Mesa; GR = Granby; PO = Pend Oreille; PR = Priest; UP = Upper Priest; FH = Flathead; GL = Glacier National Park; SW = Swan; BR = Bear; FG = Flaming Gorge; CH = Chelan; JK = Jackson; and YS = Yellowstone. Glacier National Park includes Bowman, Kintla, Logging, and McDonald lakes. NA = not applicable.

CA CO ID MT UT WA WY Control Strategy FL BM GR PO PR UP FH GL SW BR FG CH JK YS

Cease lake trout stocking NA 92 98 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 02 07 NA Liberalize lake trout regulations NA 96 06 00 02 02 90 00 NA NA 94 04 NA 95 Promote harvest of lake trout NA 00 06 00 NA NA 01 00 NA NA 94 01 NA 95 Monetary incentive to harvest lake trout NA NA NA 06 NA NA 02 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Intensive netting of lake trout ? ? NA 06 NA 98 ? ? 08 NA NA NA NA 96 for lake trout NA NA NA 03 NA NA ? NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Control lake trout movement NA NA NA NA NA ? NA 05 NA NA NA NA NA NA Stock sterile lake trout NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 02 NA NA NA NA Control lake trout at spawning sites NA ? NA 07 NA NA ? ? ? NA NA NA NA 04

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 431 Montana ing fish species in Flathead Lake has been more attenuated. Coincident with the increase in lake trout was a decline in The Columbia River headwaters in northwestern Montana adfluvial westslope cutthroat trout and a reduction in the bull currently support about 20 populations of nonnative lake trout spawning run in the Flathead River system, to roughly trout, some of which were intentionally introduced, including half their abundance in the 1980s (MFWP and CSKT 2001). the Flathead Lake population in 1905 (Spencer et al. 1991). The decline of these species was attributed to lake trout pre- Most of the non-introduced populations, however, have dation as bioenergetics simulations estimated that lake trout resulted from the natural dispersal of lake trout through inter- consumed high numbers of westslope cutthroat trout and bull connected waterways from the original population established trout in Flathead Lake (Beauchamp et al. 2006). This decline in Flathead Lake. Complete colonization by lake trout of most in the bull trout population contributed to the 1992 petition or all lakes in the Flathead River basin that are not isolated and eventual decision to protect bull trout, range-wide, as by fish passage barriers is now considered likely (Fredenberg et “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act in 1998. al. 2007; Meeuwig 2008). Waters of the Flathead River basin, The expansion of the lake trout population also trans- including Swan Lake and lakes within Glacier National Park, formed the recreational fishery of Flathead Lake. Kokanee pro- historically provided a stronghold for adfluvial bull trout and vided annual harvests exceeding 200,000 fish from the 1950s westslope cutthroat trout. into the 1980s (Graham and Fredenberg 1983), a period when lake trout were present, but largely preceding the arrival of M. Flathead Lake relicta. During the 1980s, annual angler use at Flathead Lake averaged about 89,500 angler-days (MFWP 2008). Since the Flathead Lake is the largest freshwater lake in the western collapse of kokanee, has averaged about United States (Table 1). It formerly contained a small popula- 54,000 angler-days annually (MFWP 2008). Further, the ongo- tion of lake trout dominated by large fish that were typically ing increase in lake trout resulted in density-dependent reduc- caught by anglers in a specialized troll fishery that constituted tions in lake trout growth rate and condition, and increased less than 2% of the total angler catch of all species (Graham age at maturity (CSKT and MFWP 2006). and Fredenberg 1983). The abundance of lake trout increased Managers responded to the changes in the Flathead Lake rapidly after M. relicta migrated downstream into Flathead fish community with an updated plan Lake from upstream lakes, including Swan Lake, where they (MFWP and CSKT 2001). The plan sought to conserve the had been intentionally planted in 1968 to enhance growth of remaining bull trout and westslope cutthroat trout by reducing kokanee (Beattie and Clancy 1991). In Flathead Lake, M. rel- lake trout abundance, while maintaining a viable recreational icta reached peak densities around 1986 (130 / m2), only five fishery. Because lake trout represented up to 90% of the rec- years after they were first detected, and rapidly triggered trophic reational sport fish catch in Flathead Lake during the 1990s changes that cascaded through the entire food web (Spencer (Evarts et al. 1994), the decision to reduce lake trout numbers et al. 1991). Among these was the decline of cladocerans that proved controversial. As a compromise with the angling pub- contributed to the abrupt collapse of the popular kokanee fish- lic, a protective slot-limit was kept in place to maintain trophy ery that had dominated the lake’s sport fishery for 60 years lake trout (Table 3). (Beattie and Clancy 1991; Deleray et al. 1999; Spencer et al. Beginning in 2001, the first strategy in a planned pro- 1999). From 1993 to1997, Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks gression of measures to reduce lake trout was to encourage and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes attempted increased angler harvest of lake trout < 76 cm TL (Table 5). to reestablish the kokanee fishery by stocking about 5.8 mil- Advantages of this approach were its cost-effectiveness and the lion kokanee (mostly yearling fish 13-15 cm TL) in Flathead social acceptability of anglers harvesting surplus fish. While Lake (Deleray et al. 1995; Fredenberg et al. 1999). Beauchamp the harvest of lake trout increased from about 2,000/y before et al. (2006) estimated that 87% of the stocked kokanee were M. relicta to roughly 50,000/y recently, it remained uncertain consumed by lake trout within one year of their release. This whether recreational angling alone could offset the productive provided evidence that the expanded lake trout population, capacity of a lake trout population in a lake as large and well rather than competition with M. relicta, was primarily respon- suited for lake trout as Flathead Lake. Attempts to achieve an sible for the demise of kokanee (Carty et al. 1997; Deleray et even higher recreational harvest of lake trout have been lim- al. 1999). ited by the propensity of anglers to release much of their catch, M. relicta shifted the energy flow in the Flathead Lake food despite a very high bag limit (Table 3) and no seasonal fish- web from pelagic pathways relied upon by planktivores, such ing closures. Angling pressure for lake trout at Flathead Lake as kokanee, to benthic pathways benefiting lake trout and lake remained relatively low (about 3 h/ha/y; Evarts et al. 1994). To whitefish (Tohtz 1993; Chess and Stanford 1998; Deleray et bolster angler interest in catching and harvesting lake trout, al. 1999). In Flathead Lake, M. relicta constituted up to 75% management agencies have sponsored annual spring and fall of the caloric intake of juvenile lake trout and up to 20% of fishing contests since the fall of 2002, providing substantial the intake of lake whitefish (Beauchamp et al. 2006). M. rel- monetary rewards to individual anglers based on the number icta accelerated the expansion of lake trout and lake whitefish of lake trout they harvest. The contests have grown rapidly, numbers to levels that ultimately suppressed M. relicta to about accounting for over 20,000 of the estimated 50,000 total lake one-third of their peak levels (Wicklum 1999; Beauchamp et trout harvested in 2007 and in 2008. However, none of the al. 2006). monitoring indicated that this level of harvest reduced the While the lake trout expansion caused the rapid elimina- lake trout population. Managers continue to evaluate the tion of kokanee through predation, the effect on the remain- amount of harvest necessary to reduce the lake trout popula-

432 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g tion, while considering socially and economically compatible lake trout that presumably migrated from Swan Lake were means to achieve it (CSKT and MFWP 2006). detected 90 km upstream in Lindbergh Lake (MFWP 2009).

Glacier National Park Utah

Bull trout have declined over the last 25-30 years in the four Bear Lake (Utah-Idaho) and Flaming Gorge Reservoir largest lakes on the west side of Glacier National Park (Kintla, (Utah-Wyoming) represent contrasting management sce- Bowman, Logging, and McDonald) in association with the narios. In Bear Lake, the fishery includes a unique combina- establishment of lake trout (Fredenberg 2002; Meeuwig 2008). tion of endemic fishes that are preyed upon by lake trout. In These lake trout populations, which invaded from downstream Flaming Gorge Reservoir, the fishery is supported entirely by or adjacent populations, are a direct result of the initial intro- non-native fishes with lake trout as a top piscivore. Because duction that occurred in Flathead Lake over 100 years ago. fishery management of each of these waters is shared between This colonization and proliferation by lake trout is ongoing in two states, differences and compromises regarding lake trout other former bull trout strongholds within Glacier National management have occurred. Park. Lake trout were recently documented in Harrison, Rogers, Lower Quartz, and Quartz lakes (Fredenberg et al. Bear Lake 2007; Meeuwig 2008). Lake trout dispersal apparently contin- ues via migration throughout the interconnected headwater The Bonneville cutthroat trout (O. clarkii utah) in Bear lakes in Glacier National Park. Lake evolved with a unique endemic fish assemblage includ- Biologists are actively seeking means to control or elimi- ing Bear Lake whitefish Prosopium ( abyssicola), Bonneville nate lake trout in former bull trout strongholds in Glacier cisco (P. gemmifer), Bonneville whitefish P. ( spilonotus), and National Park (Fredenberg et al. 2007). Lake trout growth in Bear Lake sculpin (Cottus extensus; Nielson and Lentsch 1988; Lake McDonald and other similarly oligotrophic headwater Tolentino 2007b). Bonneville cutthroat trout in Bear Lake lakes is extremely slow (Figure 2). Consequently, the control become piscivorous as they mature and they feed on the lake’s of lake trout abundance is considered feasible (Dux 2005). In endemic fishes (Nielson and Lentsch 1988). The three species 2008, all lake trout bag and length limits were eliminated for of Prosopium are also popular sport fish with regulated harvest. lakes west of the Continental Divide in Glacier National Park Lake trout were first stocked into the lake in 1911 (Crossman (Table 3). However, limited access to most park waters and 1995) and have been stocked annually in recent years (Ruzycki low levels of angler interest in lake trout hamper the potential et al. 2001). Lake trout provide very popular yield and trophy for sport fishing to reduce lake trout numbers.O ther successful components in the Bear Lake fishery in the Utah portion of means of suppressing lake trout will be necessary to combat the lake, and the notion of eliminating lake trout stocking is the growing threat to native fish and ecosystems in Glacier extremely unpopular with anglers. In a recent creel survey by National Park. Utah, anglers targeted lake trout more than native Bonneville Glacier National Park also suffered repercussions from the cutthroat trout (Tolentino 2007a). lake trout-induced kokanee collapse in Flathead Lake. The Concern about lake trout proliferation, competition with demise of non-native kokanee in Flathead Lake ultimately had adult cutthroat trout, and predation on stocked juvenile cut- a cascading effect on birds and mammals feeding on spawn- throat trout and endemic fishes has raised the issue of whether ing kokanee, their eggs, and carcasses in McDonald Creek lake trout should continue to be stocked in Bear Lake (Ruzycki (Spencer et al. 1991). This impact was best documented on et al. 2001; Kennedy et al. 2006). Stocking lake trout decou- the winter congregation of hundreds of bald eagles (Table 4). ples them from regulatory mechanisms such as prey abundance Because alternate food sources for eagles were unavailable in and their predatory inertia due to their long life and capac- the area, the eagles moved to winter elsewhere in the western ity to reach large size spans decades (Johnson and Martinez United States. 1995; Ruzycki et al. 2001). However, lake trout continue to be stocked because reproductive success is apparently low Swan Lake due to egg predation, limited spawning habitat, and a unique water chemistry that precipitates calcium carbonate, suffo- Swan Lake was believed to be isolated from Flathead Lake cating lake trout eggs deposited in rocky substrate. Although by a century-old barrier preventing the upstream movement natural recruitment of lake trout is limited, concern remains of fish. Despite this, lake trout were first detected in Swan that unforeseen factors could facilitate lake trout recruitment Lake in 1998, raising concern that predation would threaten which would increase predation on native species (Ruzycki et the lake’s robust bull trout and kokanee populations and the al. 2001). If increased predation by lake trout coincided with popular fishery they support. In 2008, gill netting performed lowered lake levels known to reduce natural reproduction of by commercial fishery consultants removed nearly 4,000 lake Bonneville cutthroat trout and spawning substrate for the trout and estimated a population of 8,000 lake trout > 175 mm endemic prey fishes (Ruzycki et al. 1998), lake trout may sup- in the lake (Montana State University, unpublished data). In press these species (Ruzycki et al. 2001). However, lowered addition, following sonic-tagged lake trout led biologists to two lake levels would also reduce the amount of rocky habitat used major spawning locations. Based on the success of these initial by lake trout for spawning, potentially reducing lake trout investigations, management agencies are pursuing a 3-year recruitment as well. experimental pilot project to drastically reduce the lake trout Although lake trout had been stocked in Bear Lake at a population in Swan Lake by aggressive gill netting. In 2009, higher rate for over 90 years without developing a naturally

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 433 recruiting population, the frequency of lake trout stocking and Haddix and Budy (2005) suggested that rainbow trout survival the number stocked have been reduced, The stocking rate was was reduced by lake trout predation and that rainbow trout reduced to an average of 0.25/ha/y from 1990 to 2006 (Nielson growth was suppressed by predator avoidance behavior, and and Tolentino 2002; Tolentino 2007a) despite bioenergetic recommended a trophic economics approach (e.g., Johnson simulations of predation by lake trout under different stocking and Martinez 2000) to re-evaluate lake trout and rainbow trout rates that projected that Bear Lake could support an annual management in the reservoir. Adding to the overall concern rate up to 0.6/ha (Albrecht et al. 2004). This lower stocking about demand for prey in the reservoir is the recent discovery rate has reduced the number of lake trout in the lake based on of the piscivorous (Lota lota). lower catch rates of lake trout in standardized gill net sampling. Further, as a compromise to eliminating lake trout stocking in Washington Bear Lake, Utah and Idaho agreed to stock only triploid lake trout. Effort began in 2000 to produce sterile lake trout (Bill Horton, IDFG, pers. comm.) using pressure treatment of fertil- Lake Chelan ized eggs to produce triploid lake trout (Kozfkay et al. 2005). Future work will evaluate the fishery performance of triploid Lake trout were introduced into Lake Chelan in the early lake trout compared to previous years when diploid lake trout 1980s to add a trophy component to the fishery. More recently, were stocked. however, managers have become concerned about their predatory and competitive impacts to introduced kokanee Flaming Gorge Reservoir and Chinook salmon, along with native westslope cutthroat trout and pygmy whitefish (Viola and Foster 2002). Stunting Since completion in 1962, Flaming Gorge Reservoir has of kokanee and angler dissatisfaction with these small fish been recognized for its salmonid fisheries (Teuscher and Luecke led to the introduction of M. relicta in 1968 to provide prey 1996), first for rainbow trout in the 1960s, trophy brown trout for kokanee (Brown 1984). Following the establishment in the 1970s, and kokanee and trophy lake trout since the of M. relicta, however, the kokanee population crashed and 1980s (Luecke et al. 1994). Initially, in the 1970s, brown trout lake trout recruitment was enhanced (Brown 1984). Despite feeding on abundant, introduced Utah chub (Gila atraria) pro- the increase in lake trout abundance, kokanee gradually duced trophy-sized fish exceeding 13.6 kg. By the early 1980s, rebounded to become the most abundant pelagic fish in the abundances of brown trout and trophy-sized rainbow trout lake (Schoen 2007) and they currently support the most popu- began to dwindle as prey densities declined. Kokanee were lar fishery (DES 2000). Comparisons of shallow and deep por- introduced in 1963 and have been stocked periodically there- tions of Lake Chelan support the hypothesis that lake basins after (Gipson and Hubert 1993), but their abundance has been of decreasing depth sustain increased zooplankton production sustained primarily by natural reproduction (Yule and Luecke that remains available to kokanee despite the presence of M. 1993). Lake trout entered the reservoir by downstream disper- relicta (Martinez and Wiltzius 1995; Schoen 2007). However, sal from Fremont Lake, Wyoming, and reached trophy sizes by while lake trout exploitation of both profundal M. relicta and the mid-1980s, producing the Utah state record in 1988 (Table pelagic kokanee may be less efficient in deeper basins, the 2). The decline in Utah chub and its replacement by kokanee availability of M. relicta would still likely facilitate an increase as the most abundant pelagic fish in the reservoir by 1990 was in the number of lake trout that prey on kokanee and other attributed to the Utah chub’s higher vulnerability to lake trout pelagic fishes (Schoen 2007). predation (Yule and Luecke 1993). From 1980 to 1988, the Naturally reproducing Chinook salmon crashed in 1999, harvested biomass of lake trout decreased by 15%, likely due due in part to competition with lake trout (Viola and Foster to overfishing or a decline in prey availability (Luecke et al. 2002). Further, the Washington Department of Fish and 1994). Luecke et al. (1994) confirmed that lake trout growth Wildlife recognized the threat that lake trout posed to kokanee potential had declined during 1990-1993 due to decreased prey and cutthroat trout in Lake Chelan. An increase in lake trout densities. abundance would likely preclude increasing the abundance Agency concern over prey availability for lake trout and of westslope cutthroat trout and increase predation on pygmy the possibility of excessive predation by lake trout stimulated whitefish. Bull trout were extirpated from the lake by the 1940s discussions between Utah and Wyoming about maintaining and it is believed that attempts to reintroduce them would be the slot-limit regulation protecting large lake trout. Initially, unsuccessful due to present lake trout abundance (Viola and anglers in the two states viewed the popularity of the trophy Foster 2002). To slow or prevent a substantial increase in lake lake trout fishery in Flaming Gorge Reservoir differently. trout abundance, lake trout stocking was discontinued in 2002 During the early 1990s, this discrepancy led to several years (Table 5), and the length and bag limits for lake trout were when the lake trout regulations differed between Utah and removed in 2004 (Table 1). Wyoming. Wyoming retained the slot-length limit, which pro- moted the trophy lake trout fishery. Utah adopted a minimum- Wyoming length limit for lake trout that de-emphasized lake trout, while striving to satisfy demand for a more family-oriented fishery Jackson and Yellowstone lakes lie within national parks consisting of rainbow trout and kokanee. Both states later where fishery management includes a growing emphasis on agreed to the same minimum-length regulation (Table 1) and native fish species, including Yellowstone cutthroat trout (O. have since increased the bag limit incrementally due to con- clarkii bouveri). Lake trout colonized Jackson Lake through cern about increasing lake trout predation on other salmonids. downstream dispersal from Lewis and Shoshone lakes in

434 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Yellowstone National Park, where they had been introduced impacts to bald eagles in Glacier National Park, the severe in 1890 (Stephens and Gipson 2004). Lake trout were illegally reduction of Yellowstone cutthroat trout in Yellowstone Lake moved into Yellowstone Lake from Lewis Lake, probably in the has reduced a traditional food resource for local grizzly bears 1980s (Munro et al. 2005). (Haroldson et al. 2005) and ospreys (Table 4). Due to their deepwater distribution most of the year and in-lake spawning, Jackson Lake lake trout are largely unavailable to terrestrial vertebrates that once exploited seasonally abundant Yellowstone cutthroat Jackson Lake lies within Grand Teton National Park and trout in the lake’s shallows and tributary streams (Schullery is home to native Snake River cutthroat trout, a morphotype and Varley 1995; Stapp and Hayward 2002). of the Yellowstone cutthroat trout (O. c. bouveri spp.; Behnke Given these massive ecosystem impacts, the park responded 1992). The lake has been managed for trophy lake trout since with an intensive program to reduce lake trout in Yellowstone 1937 and is closed to fishing in October to protect spawning Lake. Regulations implemented in 1995 require anglers to lake trout (O’Ney and Gipson 2006). However, lake trout have kill all lake trout caught in Yellowstone Lake or its tributar- been associated with a substantial decline in the lake’s Snake ies (Table 1; Koel et al. 2005) and instruct anglers who do River cutthroat trout (Behnke 1992). Jackson Lake is locally not want to keep the lake trout they catch to puncture the air regarded as a top producer of trophy lake trout (Rhea 2007) bladder to sink the carcass (YNP 2009). Additionally, gill net- and it produced a state record lake trout (Table 2). Given the ting that began in 1996 was intensified in 2001, with the goal popularity of this fishery, angler resistance toward efforts to of maximizing removal rates for lake trout while minimizing restore Snake River cutthroat trout in lieu of lake trout would by-catch of Yellowstone cutthroat trout (Bigelow et al. 2003). be anticipated (Quist and Hubert 2004). Further, electrofishing over aggregations of mature lake trout Lake trout are the most abundant trout species in the lake on known spawning reefs in the lake at night during the fall and population simulations showed that angling was not lim- has been conducted in an effort to maximize the annual catch iting the production of trophy lake trout under either the of lake trout. While these intensive efforts to remove lake trout Jackson Lake length limit of one trout over 61 cm TL or the appear to have slowed the expansion of lake trout numbers, statewide size limit of one trout over 50.8 cm TL (Rhea 2007). lake trout predation has contributed to the continued decline Lake trout have been stocked since 1937, including about in numbers of Yellowstone cutthroat trout (Koel et al. 2005). 36,000 (20-25 cm TL) which have been stocked annually A 2008 review of the park’s lake trout removal program recom- since 1988 (Stephens and Gipson 2004). However, lake trout mended intensifying the removal of lake trout by employing stocking in Jackson Lake ended in 2006 because stocked lake commercial fishery consultants to hasten the reduction of lake trout were rarely caught by anglers and biologists were con- trout (Gresswell 2009). cerned that lake trout competed for zooplankton, contributing to reduced condition of other salmonids. It is believed that the OVERVIEW OF LAKE TROUT elimination of lake trout stocking might benefit native fishes, CONTROL STRATEGIES including mountain whitefish and Snake River cutthroat trout (Stephens and Gipson 2004; O’Ney and Gipson 2006). Various strategies have been applied or are being tested to reduce or control lake trout abundance (Table 5). Ceasing lake Yellowstone Lake trout stocking is often the first and most logical starting point. However, only a few waters in Table 5 were being routinely or Yellowstone Lake, in Yellowstone National Park, has high- sporadically stocked with lake trout. An alternative is stocking lighted concerns about predatory impacts of non-native lake sterile lake trout, which is being tested only at Bear Lake in trout on salmonid fisheries. The high fishery quality and eco- Utah/Idaho (Table 5; Kozfkay et al. 2005). Heat- or pressure- nomic value of the Yellowstone cutthroat trout in Yellowstone shocking of eggs induces triploidy, but this may not be 100% Lake (Varley and Gresswell 1988) are threatened by lake effective in ensuring sterility (Kozfkay et al. 2006). The risk trout, which were discovered in the lake in 1994 (Kaeding et that some stocked lake trout remain fertile must be weighed al. 1996). National and international publicity of this fishery against the need to protect valued or declining fish stocks that resource problem exceeds that of any similar situation involv- are vulnerable to lake trout predation or competition. ing lake trout and has probably helped to raise awareness about Protective bag and size limits that were employed to pro- the threat of excessive predation by non-native lake trout in mote popular and valuable trophy lake trout fisheries tended other western lakes and reservoirs. to increase predation demand. Consequently, many of these After discovering lake trout in Yellowstone Lake, park regulations were liberalized or rescinded to facilitate increased officials convened a panel of experts to formulate - strate harvest of lake trout (Table 5). Lake trout bag limits have been gies to control lake trout numbers and mitigate their preda- low historically due to the species’ vulnerability to over-har- tory impact to Yellowstone cutthroat trout and other species vest across its native range. Bag limits have been increasingly (McIntyre 1995). A bioenergetic study of lake trout predation relaxed since 1995 in response to fishery collapses or growing on Yellowstone cutthroat trout in the lake estimated that an concerns about lake trout predation (Table 3). Increased bag average lake trout consumed 41 Yellowstone cutthroat trout limits have generally been accompanied by the rescission of per year. This posed a serious long-term threat to the sustain- protective lake trout length limits (Table 3). Slot-length lim- ability of the cutthroat trout population if expansion of the its that protected highly piscivorous lake trout caused greater lake trout population continued (Ruzycki et al. 2003). Similar predation than minimum length limits (Luecke et al. 1994). to the demise of kokanee in Flathead Lake and the cascading Further, modeling has shown that per capita consumption by

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 435 lake trout increased as the slot-length limit protecting the popu- Incorporating methods to remove or inflict mortality to lake lation from harvest was adjusted upward (Johnson and Martinez trout at spawning sites originated at Yellowstone Lake (Table 5). 1995). Despite this liberalization of bag and length limits, trophy Identification of lake trout spawning habitat using technologies lake trout continue to be produced without stringently protec- such as GIS and LIDAR may optimize the application of treat- tive regulations. Problematic predation is not restricted solely to ments to hasten lake trout eradication (Shaw et al. 2008; Bigelow waters containing or managed for trophy lake trout; therefore, 2009). Electrofishing at night over shallow rocky reefs known to even populations not specifically managed for or having few tro- concentrate spawning lake trout in the fall adds substantially to phy-size lake trout can create predation concerns as well. the annual removal of lake trout by gill netting (Patricia Bigelow, Another strategy being employed to reduce lake trout abun- unpublished data). By increasing the power output of the boat- dance and predation urges anglers to maximize harvest of lake mounted electroshocker, collateral mortality may increase on trout (Table 5). Often, the focus is on harvest of smaller lake trout fish out of reach in deeper water and possibly extend to previ- to slow recruitment of older, larger, more piscivorous individuals. ously deposited lake trout eggs. Additional ideas that have been The potential success of angling in reducing or controlling lake proposed for study to help reduce lake trout spawning success in trout abundance depends on several site specific factors, including Yellowstone Lake include biodegradable polymers that would remoteness, accessibility by boats, and willingness of anglers par- serve as a deterrent to egg deposition or suffocate deposited eggs, ticipating in the fishery to harvest lake trout. At Flathead Lake, ultrasound, microwaves, or piscicides (WTU 2008). At Lake agencies encouraged and rewarded the removal of lake trout, yet Pend Oreille, “Judas” fish (sonic-tagged lake trout) led biologists anglers released as much as half of their catch outside of contest to previously unknown lake trout spawning sites that were tar- periods (Les Evarts, Confederated Salish-Kootenai Tribes, pers. geted with intensive gill netting to increase mortality. comm.). Paying anglers $15/fish to harvest lake trout in Lake Pend Oreille helped increase exploitation to a critical level, but CONCLUSIONS there would be little interest in this fishery without monetary incentives. In Yellowstone Lake and Glacier National Park, low Lake trout are widespread in the western United States, occur- fishing pressure limits the capacity of anglers to harvest significant ring in over 200 waters where they have been intentionally, ille- numbers of lake trout. gally, or invasively established, including about 79 locations in The potential for both recreational and commercial fishing to Wyoming, 60 in Colorado, 27 in Montana, 13 in California, 7 remove lake trout may also be compromised by health advisories in Washington, 7 in Idaho, and 4 in Utah, some of which we which caution humans to limit their consumption of lake trout described here. Most of what we know about lake trout biology due to high levels of contaminants such as mercury, PCBs, and and ecology is from studies throughout the species’ native range DDT. Waters in this review which have lake trout consumption in the Great Lakes and central Canada. The prevailing assump- advisories include Granby (CDPHE 2009), Pend Oreille and tion that lake trout populations are highly vulnerable to overex- Priest (IDHW 2008), Flathead and Swan (MDPHHS 2007), and ploitation (Healy 1978; Shuter 1998) is being confronted by a Chelan (WDOH 2006). Lake trout have a propensity to accumu- new paradigm emerging from the collective management chal- late contaminants in their tissues because they are a top predator. lenges lake trout impose due to their overabundance in lakes This can be confounded by the presence of M. relicta (Cabana et and reservoirs across the western United States. An underlying al. 1994; Stafford et al. 2004). Large lake trout commonly display ecological problem in all affected waters in the western United higher burdens of contaminants than other piscivores due to their States is the evolutionary mismatch of lake trout with native older age at comparable sizes and their non-migratory behavior. fishes in these lakes, and most of the other sport fish established Where reduction of lake trout numbers by angling alone or stocked to sustain diverse and productive fisheries (Johnson proves too slow or infeasible, mechanical removal may help (Koel and Martinez 1995). In these ecosystems where managers try to et al. 2005 Hansen et al. 2008). Intensive removal of lake trout control artificial assemblages of native and/or non-native fish that by agency personnel or commercial fishery consultants using com- did not coevolve, lake trout prey heavily on fish or compete for mercial netting techniques is being applied in Pend Oreille, Upper resources where niches overlap. This situation is exacerbated in Priest, Swan, and Yellowstone lakes (Table 5). Netting to control waters containing M. relicta because they may shift food resources lake trout abundance can be costly in large lakes. At Yellowstone toward deepwater or benthic fishes, benefiting the recruitment, Lake, the annual budget for gill netting has been about $300,000. growth, and survival of juvenile lake trout (Bowles et al. 1991; At Lake Pend Oreille, the annual cost to deploy deep-water trap Beauchamp et al. 2006; Hansen et al. 2008). Alternatively, M. nets and gill nets has been about $400,000. Public support for the relicta predation on zooplankton may reduce the food resources removal of non-native salmonids to preserve native species may and abundance of planktivorous fishes that serve as prey for large be more forthcoming in some national parks (Quist and Hubert lake trout, thereby reducing the growth of adult lake trout (Bowles 2004). However, even here, the cost of control programs com- et al. 1991; Stafford et al. 2002). petes with other management needs (Settle and Shogren 2002). Because lake trout must consume large fish prey, even if they In addition, incidental catch or mortality of non-target fishes, are rare, to reach larger body sizes (Hubert et al. 1994; Pazzia et especially rare native fishes, must be avoided. al. 2002), introduced lake trout often prey on the adults of valued Development of technologies to control movement of lake sport and rare native fishes in waters of the western United States. trout would help in situations where lake trout pose an invasive Excessive predation by lake trout could result in cascading impacts threat to native fishes. The use of behavioral or physical barriers that extend beyond the confines of the affected water body, pos- for limiting movement of lake trout, however, must be weighed ing a threat to terrestrial portions of the ecosystem (Quist and against the collateral impacts on migratory native species such as Hubert 2004). The predatory inertia of lake trout (the ability to bull trout (Muhlfeld and Marotz 2005). resist starvation, tolerate a depressed prey base for years, and then

436 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g quickly respond to increased prey availability) can also create in kokanee (Crockett et al. 2006). In Flathead Lake, where ecological or economic obstacles to reestablishing or rebuilding kokanee were eliminated, the abundance of lake trout >40 cm populations of fishes extinguished or depressed by lake trout pre- TL was estimated to be 5.12/ha (Deleray et al. 1999; Beauchamp dation. Furthermore, the collapse of highly preferred prey species, et al. 2006). Further, lake trout are able to sustain high predation such as kokanee, can have a cascading impact on other salmonids rates even at low prey densities, perhaps due to their large search that are next in order of prey preference (e.g., cutthroat trout or volume (Eby et al. 1995) and tendency to be cruising predators bull trout). (Vogel and Beauchamp 1999). Given these factors, if prey fishes Kokanee in waters of the western United States are often con- were highly aggregated, as would be the case in strongly school- sidered to be innocuous (they do not hybridize with or prey upon ing species like kokanee, a decrease in prey abundance would not other fishes) and ecologically valuable (Dunham et al. 2008), result in a lower rate of predation by lake trout until prey numbers but they are exceedingly vulnerable to predation by lake trout. were severely reduced (Eby et al. 1995). In Priest Lake, kokanee continued to be primary, preferred prey In some popular media, the collective effort to control lake trout of lake trout after kokanee declined to well below historic levels in various waters of the western United States has been described (Mauser et al. 1988; Rieman et al. 1979; Bowles et al. 1991). Even in terms such as the “War on Western Mackinaw.” As we have after kokanee were no longer detectable in the sport fishery or shown, lake trout management issues across this region—such as in trawls, they continued to constitute 5–13% of the lake trout public demand for lake trout fisheries and the conflicts that arise diet. In Flathead Lake, kokanee remained a dominant item in the when lake trout become an ecological or economic liability for diet of lake trout in the years immediately following their collapse (Stafford et al. 2002), despite there being no reported catches of the management of other valued sport or native fish—have much kokanee by anglers (Spencer et al. 1991). The reduction or loss of in common. Providing better information to the public about the kokanee as prey for lake trout can reduce growth rates or dimin- ecological challenges of managing lake trout might help diffuse ish trophy potential for lake trout. This has been documented at criticism focused on agencies or employees embroiled in local Flathead Lake (Stafford et al. 2002), Granby Reservoir (Martinez management controversies. Information for public distribution 2005), and Priest Lake (Bowles et al. 1991). Even at seemingly should outline concerns about the potential pitfalls of lake trout low densities, lake trout can be problematic. In Lake Pend Oreille, stocking and protective regulations, encourage anglers to harvest lake trout posed a predatory threat to kokanee at an estimated more lake trout, and provide recipes to help anglers prepare their adult lake trout density of 0.28/ha and a total lake trout density catch for consumption. The emerging understanding of this issue of about 0.94/ha (Hansen et al. 2008). In Blue Mesa Reservoir, should clarify this message to help address misinformation among estimated densities for lake trout > 42.5 cm TL of 1.38/ha and for anglers, reduce contentiousness, and facilitate management and lake trout > 56.4 cm TL of 0.69/ha were associated with a decline protection of sport and native fish populations.

Floy Tag

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 437 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Brown, L. G. 1984. Lake Chelan fishery investigations. Washington Department of Fish and Game, Olympia. Billy Atkinson, Dan Brauch, and Rob Gipson provided Cabana, G. A., Tremblay, J. Kalff, and J. B. Rasmussen. 1994. comments on early drafts of the manuscript. Reviewers David Pelagic food chain structure in Ontario lakes: a determinant of Beauchamp and Jim Ruzycki provided literature and suggested mercury levels in lake trout. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and revisions that improved the manuscript. We thank Michael Aquatic Sciences 51:381-389. Hansen for his in-depth editorial assistance. Carty, D., W. Fredenberg, L. Knotek, M. Deleray, and B. Hansen. 1997. Hungry Horse Dam fisheries mitigation: kokanee REFERENCES stocking and monitoring in Flathead Lake. Bonneville Power Administration, DOE/BP-60559-3, Portland, Oregon. Albrecht, B., J. Robinson, C. Luecke, and B. Kennedy. 2004. CDOW (Colorado Division of Wildlife). 2009. DOW working to Bioenergetics simulations assessing the consumption demand balance fishery at Blue Mesa Reservoir. CDOW, Denver. Available of different stocking regimes of sterile lake trout in Bear Lake at: http://wildlife.state.co.us/NewsMedia/PressReleases/. (July Utah-Idaho. Final report to Idaho Department of Fish and Game. 2009). Department of Aquatic, Watershed, and Earth Resources, Utah CDPHE (Colorado Department of Public Health and State University, Logan. Environment). 2009. Granby Reservoir fish consumption advi- Al-Chokhachy, R., M. Peacock, L. Heki, and G. Thiede. In sory. CDPHE, Denver. Available at: www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/ press. Evaluating the reintroduction potential of Lahontan cut- fishcon/09GranbyADVISO.pdf. (June 2009) throat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii henshawi) in Fallen Leaf Lake, Chess, D. W., and J. A. Stanford. 1998. Comparative energetics California. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. and life cycle of the opossum shrimp (Mysis relicta) in native and Allen, B. C., S. Chandra, L. Atwell, J. Vander Zanden, and J. non-native environments. Freshwater Biology 40:783-794. E. Reuter. 2006. Evaluation of the reintroduction of native Clarke, L. R., D. T. Vidergar, and D. H. Bennett. 2005. Stable Lahontan cutthroat trout, Oncorhynchus clarkii henshawi, in isotopes and gut content show diet overlap among native and Fallen Leaf Lake, California, and development of management introduced piscivores in a large oligotrophic lake. Ecology of strategies for recovery. Final Report submitted to the U. S. Fish Freshwater Fish 14:267-277. and Wildlife Service, Reno, Nevada. Conrad, R. H., and J. L. Gutmann. 1996. Conversion equa- Beattie, W. D., and P. T. Clancey. 1991. Effects of Mysis relicta on tions between fork length and total length for Chinook salmon the zooplankton community and kokanee population in Flathead (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Northwest Fishery Resource Lake, Montana. American Fisheries Society Symposium 9:39-48. Bulletin, Project Report Series 5. Northwest Indian Fisheries Beauchamp, D. A. 1996. Estimating predation losses under differ- Commission, Olympia, Washington. ent lake trout population sizes and kokanee stocking scenarios in Crockett, H. J., B. M. Johnson, P. J. Martinez, and D. Brauch. Flathead Lake. Final Report of Utah Cooperative Fisheries and 2006. Modeling target strength distributions to improve hydroa- Wildlife Research Unit to Montana Department of Fish Wildlife coustic estimation of lake trout population size. Transactions of and Parks, Kalispell. the American Fisheries Society 135:1095-1108. Beauchamp, D. A., B. C. Allen, R. C. Richards, W. A. Crossman, E. J. 1995. Introduction of the lake trout (Salvelinus Wurtsbaugh, and C. R. Goldman. 1992. Lake trout spawning namaycush) in areas outside of its native distribution: a review. in Lake Tahoe: egg incubation in deepwater macrophyte beds. Journal of Great Lakes Research 21 (Supplement 1): 17-29. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 12:442-449. CSKT and MFWP (Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, Beauchamp, D. A., M. W. Kershner, Overman, N. C., J. and Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks). 2006. Phase II of Rhydderch, J. Lin, and L. Hauser. 2006. Trophic interactions the five year review of the Flathead Lake and River Fisheries of nonnative lake trout and lake whitefish in the Flathead Lake Co-Management Plan, technical synopsis and management food web. Report to the Confederated Salish-Kootenai Tribes. recommendations section. CSKT and MFWP, Pablo/Kalispell, Washington Cooperative Fisheries and Wildlife Research Unit, Montana. University of Washington, Seattle. deLeeuw, A. D., D. J. Cadden, D. H. G. Ableson, and S. Beauchamp, D. A., D. Wahl, and B. M. Johnson. 2007. Predator- Hatlevik. 1991. Lake trout management strategy for northern prey interactions. Pages 765-842 in C. S. Guy and M. J. Brown, British Columbia. British Columbia Ministry of Environment, eds. Analysis and interpretation of inland fisheries data. Fisheries Branch, Prince George. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland. Deleray, M., W. Fredenberg, and B. Hansen. 1995. Kokanee Behnke, R. J. 1992. Native trout of western North America. stocking and monitoring, Flathead Lake – 1993-1994. Report American Fisheries Society Monograph 6. Bethesda, Maryland. DOE/BP-65903-6. Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Bigelow, P. E. 2009. Predicting areas of lake trout spawning habi- Oregon. tat within Yellowstone Lake, Wyoming. Doctoral dissertation. Deleray, M., L. Knotek, S. Rumsey, and T. Weaver. 1999. University of Wyoming, Laramie. Flathead Lake and River system fisheries status report. DJ report Bigelow, P. E., T. M. Koel, D. Mahony, B. Ertel, B. Rowdon, F-78-R-1 through 5, Element 1, Project 1 and 2, SBAS Project and S. T. Olliff. 2003. Protection of native Yellowstone cut- throat trout in Yellowstone Lake—Yellowstone National Park, 3131. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Kalispell. Wyoming. Technical Report NPS/NFWRD/NRTR-2003/314. Dextrase, A. J., and H. E. Ball. 1991. Hooking mortality of National Park Service, Water Resources Division, Fort Collins, lake trout angled through the ice. North American Journal of Colorado. Fisheries Management 11:477-479. Bowles, E. C., B. E. Rieman, G. R. Mauser, and D. H. Bennett. Donald, D. B., and D. J. Alger. 1986. Stunted lake trout (Salvelinus 1991. Effects of introductions of Mysis relicta on fisheries in north- namaycush) from the Rocky Mountains. Canadian Journal of ern Idaho. American Fisheries Society Symposium 9:65-74. Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 43:608-612.

438 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g _____. 1993. Geographic distribution, species displacement, and Frantz, T. C., and A. J. Cordone. 1970. Food of lake trout in Lake niche overlap for lake trout and bull trout in mountain lakes. Tahoe. California Fish and Game 56:21-35. Canadian Journal of Zoology 71:238-247. Fredenberg, W. 2002. Further evidence that lake trout displace DES (Duke Engineering and Services). 2000. Lake Chelan fisheries bull trout in mountain lakes. Intermountain Journal of Sciences investigation. Lake Chelan Hydroelectric Project 637. Prepared 8:143-152. for Public Utility District 1, Chelan County, Bellingham, Fredenberg, W., D. Carty., M. Deleray, L, Knotek, and B. Washington. Hansen. 1999. Hungry Horse Dam fisheries mitigation: kokanee Dunham, J., C. Baxter, K. Fausch, W. Fredenberg, S. Kitano, I. stocking and monitoring in Flathead Lake. Final Report to the Koizumi, K. Morita, T. Nakamura, B. Rieman, K. Savvaitova, U.S. Department of Energy. Bonneville Power Administration, J. Stanford, E. Taylor, and S. Yamamoto. 2008. Evolution, Portland Oregon. ecology, and conservation of Dolly Varden, white-spotted char, Fredenberg, W., M. Meeuwig, and C. Guy. 2007. Action plan and bull trout. Fisheries 33(11):537-530. to conserve bull trout in Glacier National Park. U.S. Fish and DuPont, J., M. Liter, and N. Horner. 2004. Panhandle Region Wildlife Service, Kalispell, Montana. mountain lakes investigations. 2001 annual performance report. Gerstung, E. R. 1988. Status, life history, and management of Idaho Fish and Game, Coeur d’Alene. the Lahontan cutthroat trout. American Fisheries Society _____. In press. Regional fisheries management investigations. Idaho Symposium 4:93-106. Department of Fish and Game, Federal Aid in Fish Restoration, Gipson, R. D., and W. A. Hubert. 1993. Spawning-site selec- F-71-R-30 Subproject 1, Job a, Performance Report, Boise. tion by kokanee along the shoreline of Flaming Gorge Dux, A. M. 2005. Distribution and population characteristics of Reservoir, Wyoming-Utah. North American Journal of Fisheries lake trout in Lake McDonald, Glacier National Park: implica- Management 13:475-482. tions for suppression. Master’s thesis. Montana State University, Graham, P., and W. Fredenberg. 1983. Flathead Lake Bozeman. census. Flathead River Basin environmental impact study. Eby, L. A., A. G. Rudstram, and J. F. Kitchell. 1995. Predator Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Kalispell. responses to prey population dynamics: an empirical analysis Gresswell, R. E. 2009. Scientific review panel evaluation of based on lake trout growth rates. Canadian Journal of Fisheries the National Park Service lake trout suppression program in and Aquatic Sciences 52:1564-1571. Yellowstone Lake. Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center Evarts, L., B. Hansen, and J. DosSantos. 1994. Flathead Lake Final Report U.S. Geological Survey. Bozeman, Montana. angler survey, 1992-1993. Report DOE/BP-60479-1. Bonneville Haddix, T., and P. Budy. 2005. Factors that limit growth and Power Administration, Portland, Oregon. abundance of rainbow trout across ecologically distinct areas

Halltech Aquatic Research, Inc.

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 439 of Flaming Gorge Reservoir, Utah-Wyoming. North American Johnson, B. M., P. J. Martinez, and J. D. Stockwell. 2002. Journal of Fisheries Management 25:1082-1094. Tracking trophic interactions in coldwater reservoirs using natu- Hansen, M. 2007. Predator-prey dynamics in Lake Pend Oreille. rally occurring stable isotopes. Transactions of the American Idaho Department of Fish and Game Fishery Research Report Fisheries Society 131:1-13. 07–53, Boise. Kaeding, L. R., G. D.Boltz, and D. G. Carty. 1996. Lake trout Hansen, M. J., N. J. Horner, M. Liter, M. P. Petersen, and M. A. discovered in Yellowstone Lake threaten native cutthroat trout. Maiolie. 2008. Dynamics of an increasing lake trout population Fisheries 21(3):16-20. in Lake Pend Oreille, Idaho, USA. North American Journal of Keely, E. R., and J. W. A. Grant. 2001. Prey size of salmonids in Fisheries Management 28:1160-1171. streams, lakes, and oceans. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Hansen, M. J., M. Liter, S. Cameron, and N. Horner. 2006. Mark- Aquatic Sciences 58:1122-1132. recapture study of lake trout using large trap nets in Lake Pend Kennedy, B. M., B. W. Thompson, and C. Luecke. 2006. Ecological Oreille. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Research differences between two closely related morphologically similar Report 07–19, Boise. benthic whitefish (Prosopium spilonotus and Prosopium abyssicola) Hansen, M. J., J. W. Peck, R. G. Schorfharr, J. H. Selgeby, D. R. in an endemic whitefish complex. Canadian Journal of Fisheries Schreiner, S. T. Schramm, B. L. Swanson, W. R. MacCallum, and Aquatic Sciences 63:1700-1709. M. R. Burnham-Curtis, G. L. Curtis, J. W. Heinrich, and R. Koel, T. M., P. E. Bigelow, P. D. Doepke, B. D. Ertel, and D. L J. Young. 1995. Lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) populations Mahoney. 2005. Nonnative lake trout result in Yellowstone cut- in Lake Superior and their restoration in 1959-1993. Journal of throat trout decline and impacts to bears and anglers. Fisheries Great Lakes Research 21 (Supplement 1): 152-175. 30(11):10-19. Hardiman, J. M., B. M. Johnson, and P. J. Martinez. 2004. Do Kozfkay, J. R., J. C. Dillon, and D. J. Schill. 2006. Routine use of predators influence the distribution of age-0 kokanee ina sterile fish in salmonid sport fisheries: are we there yet? Fisheries Colorado reservoir? Transactions of the American Fisheries 31(8):392-401. Society 133:1366-1378. Kozfkay, J. R., E. J. Wagner, and D. Aplanalp. 2005. Production Haroldson, M. A., K. A. Gunther, D. P. Reinart, S. R. Podrunzy, of triploid lake trout by means of pressure treatment. North C. Cegelski, L. Waits, T. Wyman, and J. Smith. 2005. Changing American Journal of Aquaculture 67:93-97. numbers of spawning cutthroat trout in tributary streams of Liter, M., and M. A. Maiolie. 2003. Upper Priest Lake lake trout Yellowstone Lake and estimates of grizzly bears visiting streams removal and Priest Lake Thorofare strobe light evaluations. from DNA. Ursus 16:167-180. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Research Report Healy, M. C. 1978. The dynamics of exploited lake trout popu- 03-36, Boise. lations and implications for management. Journal of Wildlife Luecke, C., T. C. Edwards, Jr., M. W. Wengert, Jr., S. Brayton, Management 42:307-328. and R. Schneidervin. 1994. Simulated changes in lake trout Hubert, W. A., R. D. Gipson, and R. A. Whaley. 1994. Interpreting yield, trophies, and forage consumption under various slot limits. relative weights of lake trout stocks. North American Journal of North American Journal of Fisheries Management 14:14-21. Fisheries Management 14:212-215. Mackenzie-Grieve, J. L., and J. R. Post. 2005. Projected impacts of IDFG (Idaho Department of Fish and Game). 2007. Fisheries climate warming on production of lake trout (Salvelinus namay- management plan: 2007-2012. IDFG, Boise. Available at: http:// cush) in southern Yukon lakes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries fishandgame.idaho.gov/fish/programs/fish_plan.pdf. (January and Aquatic Sciences 63:788-797. 2008). Maiolie, M. A., K. Harding, W. Ament, and W. Harryman. 2002. IDHW (Idaho Department of Health and Welfare). 2008. Eat fish, Lake Pend Oreille fishery recovery project. Idaho Department be smart, choose wisely: safe fish eating guideline for fish caught of Fish and Game, Completion Report to Bonneville Power in Idaho waters. Bureau of Community and Environmental Administration, Contract 194-047-00, Portland, Oregon. Health, IDHW, Boise. Available at: www.healthandwelfare. Martinez, P. J. 2004. Coldwater reservoir ecology. Colorado Division idaho.gov/DesktopModules/Documents/DocumentsView.aspx of Wildlife, Federal Aid in Fish and Wildlife Restoration Project ?tabID=0&ItemID=11810&MId=12869&wversion=Staging. F-242-R11, Progress Report, Fort Collins. (January 2009). _____. 2005. Coldwater reservoir ecology. Colorado Division of Jassby, A. D. 1998. Interannual variability at three inland Wildlife, Federal Aid in Fish and Wildlife Restoration Project water sites: implications for sentinel ecosystems. Ecological F-242-R12, Progress Report, Fort Collins. Applications 8:277-287. _____. 2006. Coldwater reservoir ecology. Colorado Division of Jassby, A. D., C. R. Goldman, and T. M. Powell. 1992. Trend, Wildlife, Federal Aid in Fish and Wildlife Restoration Project seasonality, cycle, and irregular-fluctuations in primary produc- F-242-R13, Progress Report, Fort Collins. tivity at Lake Tahoe, California-Nevada, USA. Hydrobiologia Martinez, P. J., and E. P. Bergersen. 1991. Interactions of zoo- 246:195-203. plankton, Mysis relicta, and kokanees in Lake Granby, Colorado. Johnson, L. 1976. Ecology of arctic populations of lake trout, American Fisheries Society Symposium 9:49-64. Salvelinus namaycush, lake whitefish, Coregonus clupeaformis, Martinez, P. J., and W. J. Wiltzius. 1995. Some factors affecting a Arctic char, S. alpinus, and associated species in unexploited hatchery-sustained kokanee population in a fluctuating Colorado lakes of the Canadian Northwest Territories. Journal of the reservoir. North American Journal of Fisheries Management Fisheries Research Board of Canada 33:2459-2488. 15:220-228. Johnson, B. M., and P. J. Martinez. 1995. Selecting harvest regula- Mauser, G. R., R. W. Vogelsang, and C. L. Smith. 1988. tions for recreational fisheries: opportunities for research/man- Enhancement of trout in large north Idaho lakes. Federal Aid in agement cooperation. Fisheries 20(10):22-29. Fish Restoration Project F-73-R-10, Completion Report. Idaho _____. 2000. Trophic economics of lake trout management in res- Department of Fish and Game, Boise. ervoirs of differing productivity. North American Journal of McIntyre, J. D. 1995. Review and assessment of possibilities for Fisheries Management 20:127-143. protecting the cutthroat trout of Yellowstone Lake from intro-

440 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g duced lake trout. Pages 28-33 in J. D. Varley and P. Schullery, Biennual Scientific Conference on the Greater Yellowstone eds. The Yellowstone Lake crisis: confronting a lake trout inva- Ecosystem. Yellowstone Center for Resources, Yellowstone sion. National Park Service, Yellowstone Center for Resources, National Park, Wyoming. Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. Payne, N. R., R. M. Korver, D. S. MacLennan, S. J. Nepszy, B. MDPHHS (Montana Department of Public Health and Human J. Shuter, T. J. Stewart, and E. R. Thomas. 1990. The harvest Services). 2007. Montana sport fish consumption guidelines: potential and dynamics of lake trout populations in Ontario. what you need to know about mercury and PCBs in Montana’s Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto. sport fish. MDPHHS, Helena. Available at: http://fwp.mt.gov/ Pazzia, I., M. Trudel, M. Ridgeway, and J. B. Rasmussen. 2002. content/getItem.aspx?id=28187. (November 2008). Influence of food web structure on the growth and bioenerget- Meeuwig, M. H. 2008. Ecology of lacustrine-adfluvial bull trout ics of lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush). Canadian Journal of populations in an interconnected system of natural lakes. Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 59:1593-1605. Doctoral dissertation. Montana State University, Bozeman. Peterson, M. P., and M. A. Maiolie. 2005. Evaluation of large trap MFWP (Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks). 2008. Montana state- wide angling pressure. Mail survey 2007. MFWP, Bozeman. nets for lake trout removal in Lake Pend Oreille, Idaho. Idaho _____. 2009. Lake trout confirmed in Lindbergh Lake. MFWP, Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Research Report 04-35, Kalispell. http://fwp.mt.gov/news/article_8146.aspx. (June Boise. 2009). Quist, M. C., and W. A. Hubert. 2004. Bioinvasive species and MFWP and CSKT (Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks and the preservation of cutthroat trout in the western United States: Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes). 2001. Executive ecological, social, and economic issues. Environmental Science summary: Flathead Lake and River fisheries co-management and Policy 7:303-313. plan, 2001-2010. MFWP and CSKT, Kalispell/Pablo, Montana. Rhea, D. 2007. Growth and mortality of lake trout in Jackson Lake, Muhlfeld, C. C., and B. Marotz. 2005. Seasonal movement with simulated effects in changes in exploitation. Fish Division and habitat use by subadult bull trout in the upper Flathead Administrative Report. Wyoming Game and Fish Department, River system, Montana. North American Journal of Fisheries Cheyenne. Management 25:797-810. Rieman, B. E., B. Bowler, J. B. Lukens, and P. F. Hassemer, Munro, A. R., T. E. McMahon, and J. R. Ruzycki. 2005. Natural 1979. Priest Lake fisheries investigations. Federal Aid in Fish chemical markers identify source and date of introduction of an Restoration, Project F-73-R-1, Job Completion Report, Idaho exotic species: lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) in Yellowstone Department of Fish and Game, Boise. Lake. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 62: Richards, R., C. R. Goldman, E. Byron, and C. Levitan. 1991. 79-87. The mysids and lake trout of Lake Tahoe: a 25-year history of Nielson, B. R., and L. Lentsch. 1988. Bonneville cutthroat trout in changes in the fertility, plankton, and fishery of an alpine lake. Bear Lake: status and management. American Fisheries Society American Fisheries Society Symposium 9:30-38. Symposium 4:128-133. and Nielson, B. R. and S. A. Tolentino. 2002. Fisheries investiga- Richards, R. C., C. R. Goldman, T. C. Frantz R. Wickwire. tions-Bear Lake cutthroat trout enhancemnt program-January 1975. Where have all the Daphnia gone? The decline of a major 1995-December 1999. Publication 02-09. Utah Division of cladoceran in Lake Tahoe, California-Nevada. Internationale Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City. Vereinigung fur theoretishe und angewandte Limnologie O’Ney, S. and R. Gipson. 2006. A century of fisheries management Verhandlungen 19:835-842. in Grand Teton National Park. Pages 131-134 in A. Wondrak Ruzycki, J. R. 2004. Impact of lake trout introductions on cut- Biel, ed. Greater Yellowstone public lands: a century of discov- throat trout in selected western lakes of the continental United ery, hard lessons, and bright prospects. Proceedings of the 8th States. Doctoral dissertation. Utah State University, Logan.

Oregon RFID

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 441 Ruzycki, J. R., D. A. Beauchamp, and D. L. Yule. 2003. Effects of Teuscher, D., and C. Leucke. 1996. Competition between kokanees introduced lake trout on native cutthroat trout in Yellowstone Lake. and Utah chub in Flaming Gorge Reservoir, Utah-Wyoming. Ecological Applications 13:23-37. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 125:505-511. Ruzycki, J. R., W. A. Wurtsbaugh, and C. Lay. 1998. Reproductive Thiede, G. P. 1997. Impact of lake trout predation on prey populations ecology and early life history of a lacustrine sculpin. Environmental in Lake Tahoe: a bioenergetics assessment. Master’s thesis. Utah Biology of Fishes 53:117-127. State University, Logan. Ruzycki, J. R., W. A. Wurtsbaugh, and C. Luecke. 2001. Salmonine Tohtz, J. 1993. Lake whitefish diet and growth after the introduction Why Do People Drop Out of Recreational Fishing? consumption and competition for endemic prey fishes in Bear of Mysis relicta to Flathead Lake, Montana. Transactions of the Lake, Utah-Idaho. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society American Fisheries Society 122:629-635. A Study of Lapsed Fishers 130:1175-1189. Tolentino, S. A. 2007a. Bear Lake biological report for calendar year Ryder, R. A., S. R. Kerr, W. W. Taylor, and P. A. Larkin. 1981. 2006. Publication 07-20. Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt from Queensland, Australia Community consequences of fish stock diversity. Canadian Journal Lake City. of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 38:1856-1866. _____. 2007b. Population status and trends of four Bear Lake endemic fishes. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society Symposium Schoen, E. R. 2007. Pelagic trophic interactions in contrasting basins 53:77-84. of Lake Chelan. Master’s thesis. University of Washington, Seattle. Trippel, E. A. 1993. Relations of fecundity, maturation, and body size Schullery, P., and J. D Varley. 1995. Cutthroat trout and the of lake trout, and implications for management in northwestern Yellowstone ecosystem. Pages 12-21 in J. D Varley and P. Schullery, Ontario Lakes. North American Journal of Fisheries Management eds. The Yellowstone Lake crisis: confronting a lake trout inva- 13:64-72. sion. National Park Service, Yellowstone Center for Resources, USFWS (U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 1998. Bull trout Salvelinus Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. confluentus facts. Public Affairs Office, USFWS, Portland, Oregon. Scott, W. B., and E. J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Available at: library.fws.gov/Pubs1/bulltrout.pdf. (October 2005). Fisheries Research Board Bulletin 184. Vander Zanden, J. M., S. Chandra, B. C. Allen, J. E. Reuter, and Sellers, T. J., B. R. Parker, D. W. Schindler, and W. M. Tonn. 1998. C. R. Goldman. 2003. Historical food web structure of native Pelagic distribution of lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) in small aquatic communities in the Lake Tahoe (California-Nevada) basin. Canadian Shield lakes with respect to temperature, dissolved oxy- Ecosystems 6:274-288. gen, and light. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Vander Zanden, M. J., J. D. Olden, and C. Gratton. 2006. Food-web 55:170-179. approaches in restoration ecology. Pages 165-189 in D. A. Falk, M. Settle, C., and J. F. Shogren. 2002. The economics of invasive species A. Palmer, and J. B. Zedler, eds. Foundations of restoration ecology. management: modeling native-exotic species within Yellowstone Island Press, Washington, DC. Lake. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 84:1323-1328. Varley, J. D., and R. E. Gresswell. 1988. Ecology, status, and man- Shaw, J. A., J. H. Churnside, J. J. Wilson, N. E. Lerner, R. R. agement of the Yellowstone cutthroat trout. American Fisheries Tiensvold, P. E. Bigelow, and T. M. Koel. 2008. Airborne lidar Society Symposium 4:13-24. mapping of invasive lake trout in Yellowstone Lake. Proceedings Venard, J. A., and D. L. Scarnecchia. 2005. Seasonally dependent of the 24th International Laser Radar Conference Volume II:905- movement of lake trout between two northern Idaho lakes. North 908. American Journal of Fisheries Management 25:635-639. Shuter, B. J., M. L. Jones, R. M. Korver, and N. P. Lester. 1998. Vidergar, D. T. 2000. Population estimates, food habits, and estimates A general, life history based model for regional management of of consumption of selected predatory fishes in Lake Pend Oreille, fish stocks: the inland lake troutSalvelinus ( namaycush) fisheries Idaho. Master’s thesis. University of Idaho, Moscow. of Ontario. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences Viola, A. E., and J. H. Foster. 2002. Lake Chelan comprehensive 55:2161-2177. fishery management plan. Washington Department of Fish and Spencer, C., R. McClelland, and J. Stanford. 1991. Shrimp introduc- Wildlife, Olympia. tion, salmon collapse and bald eagle displacement: cascading inter- Vogel, J. L., and D. A. Beauchamp. 1999. Effects of light, prey size, actions in the food web of a large aquatic ecosystem. Bioscience and turbidity on reaction distances of lake trout (Salvelinus namay- cush) to salmonid prey. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic 41:1-14-21. Sciences 56:1293-1297. Spencer, C. R., D. S. Potter, and R. T. Bukantis, and J. A. Stanford. WDOH (Washington Department of Health). 2006. Lake Chelan 1999. Impact of predation by Mysis relicta on zooplankton in Flathead fish consumption advisory. WDOH, Olympia. Available at: www. Lake, Montana, USA. Journal of Plankton Research 21:51-64. doh.wa.gov/ehp/oehas/fact%20sheets%20pdf/fs-lkchelan2006.pdf. Stafford, C. P., B. Hansen, and J. A. Stanford. 2004. Mercury in fishes (February 2006). and their diet items from Flathead Lake, Montana. Transactions of Wicklum, D. 1999. The ecology of Mysis relicta in Flathead Lake, the American Fisheries Society 133:349-357. Montana. Report to the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. Stafford, C. P., J. A. Stanford, F. R. Hauer, and E. B. Brothers. 2002. Pablo, Montana. Changes in lake trout growth associated with Mysis relicta establish- WTU (Wyoming Trout Unlimited). 2008. Save the Yellowstone ment: a retrospective analysis using otoliths. Transactions of the cutthroat: TU, the NPS and the USGS team in lake trout American Fisheries Society 131:994-1003. effort. WTU, Lander. Available at: www.wyomingtu.org/site/c. Stapp, P., and G. D. Hayward. 2002. Effects of an introduced pisci- deIILOOpGnF/b.3942035/. (May 2008). vore on native trout: insights from a demographic model. Biological YNP (Yellowstone National Park). 2009. Fishing regulations. YNP, Invasions 4:299-316. Wyoming. www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/upload/fishreg09.pdf. Stephens, T. J., and R. D. Gipson. 2004. Summary of Jackson Lake (June 2009). fishery investigations 1971-2003 with management recommenda- Yule, D. L., and C. Luecke. 1993. Lake trout consumption and tions. Fish Division Administrative Report. Wyoming Game and recent changes in the fish assemblage of Flaming Gorge Reservoir. Fish Department, Cheyenne. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 122:1058-1069.

442 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Feature: Human Dimensions

Why Do People Drop Out of Recreational Fishing? A Study of Lapsed Fishers Steve Sutton from Queensland, Australia

Stephen G. Sutton, Sutton is principal research fellow at the Fishing and Fisheries Research Centre, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Australia. He can be contacted at [email protected]. Kara Dew worked on this project as a research associate with the Queensland Government’s Kara Dew, and Recreational Fishing Information System program. Jim Higgs worked on this project while leading the Queensland Government’s Recreational Fishing Jim Higgs Information System program.

ABSTRACT: We sought to understand declining recreational fishing participation in Introduction Queensland, Australia, by investigating why lapsed fishers ceased fishing and identifying the constraints that prevented them from resuming their fishing participation. The Recreational fishing participation primary reasons for ceasing fishing were lack of time, loss of interest, and poor fishing in Queensland, Australia, has been quality. Most lapsed fishers were able to compensate for loss of fishing activity by declining since the state government increasing participation in other activities; about one-quarter reported a decrease began measuring fishing participation in their overall leisure activity and leisure satisfaction since ceasing fishing. Half of in 1996. Between 1996 and 2004, the the lapsed fishers surveyed reported an interest in fishing again; however, only 15% percent of the Queensland population believed it was likely they would go fishing in the next 12 months. Most lapsed fishers that participated in recreational fish- interested in returning to fishing cited too many commitments, lack of knowledge about ing declined from 28.1% to 20.6% and fishing regulations, and lack of fishing partners as reasons preventing them from fishing. the number of active recreational fish- Demographic characteristics significantly influenced the reasons for ceasing fishing ers declined from 882,200 to 733,400 and the perceptions of constraints preventing resumption of fishing activity. Results (McInnes 2006). Similar trends in should help the recreational fishing sector develop strategies to deal with declining recreational fishing participation. recreational fishing participation have been observed in other jurisdictions worldwide. For example, the fish- ¿Por qué la gente abandona la pesca recreativa? ing participation rate in the United States declined from 19% (34.1 mil- Un estudio de pescadores no activos lion active fishers) to 13% (30.0 mil- lion active fishers) between 1992 and de Queensland, Australia 2006 (USFWS 2006). In Canada, the fishing participation rate declined Resumen: Se pretende entender la reducción de la participación en la pesca from 10.8% (3.2 million active fishers) recreativa en Queensland, Australia, investigando el porqué los pescadores inactivos to 7.6% (2.4 million active fishers) cesaron sus actividades e identificando las restricciones que los disuadieron de reanudar between 1995 and 2005 (DFO 2007). su participación en la pesca. Las principales razones del cese de sus actividades pesqueras These statistics indicate that people in fueron la falta de tiempo, de interés y la baja calidad de la pesca. Los pescadores que these jurisdictions are dropping out of han permanecido inactivos durante más tiempo, compensan sus pérdidas en la pesca fishing faster than new participants are incrementando su participación en otras actividades; de ellos, cerca de un cuarto being recruited to the activity. reportaron un decremento tanto en su tiempo de esparcimiento como en la satisfacción Declines in recreational fishing que obtienen de éste, desde que cesó su actividad en la pesca. La mitad de los pescadores inactivos reportan tener interés en regresar a pescar nuevamente; sin embargo, sólo participation should be of concern for 15% cree que existen buenas posibilidades de que regresen a pescar en los próximos a number of reasons. First, fewer fishers 12 meses. La mayoría de los pescadores inactivos que tienen interés en reanudar sus means that fisheries management agen- actividades en la pesca hicieron referencia a demasiadas obligaciones, como la falta de cies will be faced with a dwindling con- conocimiento acerca de las regulaciones pesqueras y la falta de socios de pesca, que los stituency resulting in reduced levels of disuaden de volver a la actividad. Las características demográficas influyen de manera public, financial, and political support significativa las razones por las cuales la gente deja de pescar y la percepción que se tiene for fisheries management, and poten- de las restricciones disuade a los pescadores inactivos de reiniciar sus actividades en la tially lower value placed on aquatic pesca. Los resultados debieran ayudar al sector pesca a desarrollar estrategias para lidiar resources by the community. Second, con la reducción en la participación dentro de la pesca recreativa. there are potential economic impacts

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 443 on businesses and communities that support recreational fishing ing partners) and intrapersonal constraints (e.g., perceived lack when people stop fishing and instead spend their leisure dollars of fishing skills) also played a role in influencing the fishing -par elsewhere (Fedler and Ditton 2001). Economic impacts may be ticipation patterns of some individuals (Fedler and Ditton 2001). particularly problematic in rural and remote areas that generate a Unfortunately, with the exception of the Texas study, few investi- significant proportion of their revenue from visiting recreational gations have focused on understanding the constraints that cause fishers. Finally, there are potential quality-of-life implications if people to cease fishing permanently or temporarily. fishers are displaced from fishing and are not able to obtain simi- It is likely that the amount and type of constraints influenc- lar benefits from other recreation activities (Ditton and Sutton ing fishing participation vary with demographic characteristics. 2004; Wightman et al. 2008). Consequently, there is a great deal Fedler and Ditton (2001) found that gender plays an important of interest in understanding why some people drop out of fishing role in consistency of fishing participation, with females com- and whether actions can be taken to halt the decline in participa- prising a larger proportion of recent dropouts and inactive fish- tion rates. Indeed, agencies and nongovernmental organizations ers in Texas. Sutton (2007) found that, among active fishers in (NGOs) in some jurisdictions have developed recreational fish- Queensland, males and higher income earners are more likely to ing recruitment and retention programs to address declining par- experience constraints on their fishing activity, but suggested that ticipation rates (see Wightman et al. 2008 for examples from the females may experience more or different constraints that inhibit USA, Norway, and Great Britain). their fishing participation overall. Age should also influence the Lapsed fishers (i.e., individuals who have participated in fish- amount and type of constraints experienced because factors such ing at some point but who do not participate currently) make up as available free time, work and family commitments, availabil- a substantial portion of the general population in some jurisdic- ity of fishing partners, and physical health and ability will have tions. For example, a 2004 statewide fisher survey in Queensland different effects at different life stages. Understanding how the revealed that approximately 50% of the population aged 5 years amount and type of constraints influencing fishing participation and over has fished at some point in their lives but not in the 12 vary with demographic characteristics would provide guidance for months prior to the survey (McInnes 2006). In the United States, developing recruitment and retention efforts targeted at different an analysis of several state fishing license databases undertaken population segments. by the Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation suggests This study was initiated by the Queensland Department of that the average fishing license renewal rate each year is approxi- Primary Industries and Fisheries (QDPI&F) and James Cook mately 50%, resulting in approximately 35 million lapsed or occa- University as part of ongoing efforts to monitor and understand sional U.S. fishers (Wightman et al. 2008). Lapsed fishers are an recreational fishing participation patterns in Queensland. In par- obvious target for retention and recruitment efforts because they ticular, QDPI&F managers were concerned over the decline in have at least some knowledge of and experience with recreational recreational fishing participation rates observed over the preced- fishing, and because many retain the desire to continue fishing ing 10 years, and were interested in gaining a better understanding (Fedler and Ditton 2001). An understanding of why some people of why this decline was occurring and how it might be reversed. drop out of fishing and the constraints that prevent them from A previous study in Queensland investigated the constraints resuming their fishing participation would provide valuable infor- experienced by active recreational fishers, and identified lapsed mation in support of recruitment and retention programs aimed fishers as a high-priority group for further study (Sutton 2007). at lapsed fishers. Accordingly, this study focused on lapsed fishers in Queensland, Individuals who cease their fishing participation likely do so with four objectives: because they encounter constraints that inhibit their continued involvement in fishing (Crawford and Godbey 1987; Fedler and 1. Understand and quantify the constraints leading to cessation Ditton 2001). These constraints may be interpersonal (i.e., affect of recreational fishing participation; an individual’s desire for fishing), intrapersonal (i.e., occur as a 2. Understand the effects of ceasing fishing participation on lei- result of interactions with other individuals), or structural (i.e., sure lifestyle; directly interfere with participation in fishing; Crawford et al. 3. Investigate the potential for reactivation of lapsed fishers and 1991; Sutton 2007). Sutton (2007) found that the majority of quantify the constraints inhibiting resumption of fishing par- active recreational fishers in Queensland experience constraints ticipation; and that inhibit their ability to participate in fishing at the level they 4. explore how demographic variables influence the perception desire. Although many fishers may be able to negotiate the con- of constraints and the potential for reactivating lapsed fishers. straints they face and maintain their fishing participation at some level (Jackson et al. 1993), the perception of constraints as ongo- Methods ing and non-negotiable will likely lead some individuals to drop out of fishing (Backman 1991). Individuals who have ceased their The target population for the study was Queensland residents fishing participation may still maintain a desire to participate, but aged 15 years or over who had participated in recreational fishing at will be unlikely to resume their participation if they continue to some time but not in the 12 months prior to the study. Individuals experience non-negotiable interpersonal or structural constraints meeting these criteria were identified as part of the QDPI&F (Fedler and Ditton 2001). In a study of lapsed fishers in Texas, longitudinal survey of recreational fishing in Queensland (RFISH) Fedler and Ditton (2001) found that structural constraints such conducted in 2004 (McInnes 2006). As part of the RFISH survey, as lack of time, low resource availability, and poor personal health a random sample of residential telephone numbers from each were the primary factors leading to ceased fishing participation of 15 statistical divisions in Queensland was selected from the and in preventing lapsed fishers from resuming their fishing par- electronic white pages for each area. The number of households ticipation. However, interpersonal constraints (e.g., lack of fish- called in each statistical division was determined using previous

444 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g angling participation rates, telephone refusal rates, and uptake To assess the potential for lapsed fishers to return to fishing, rates of maintaining an angler diary as part of the QDPI&F RFISH respondents were asked to rate the likelihood that they would go program (300 diarists per statistical division). Up to six attempts fishing “in the next 12 months” and “in the next 3-5 years” (on were made to contact each sampled household. a 5-point scale with categories ranging from 1 = not at all likely The individual who answered the telephone in each household to 5 = extremely likely). The response scale was subsequently was asked if anyone in the household had done any recreational collapsed into a 3-point scale with categories “low likelihood” fishing (including angling, spear fishing, crabbing, and prawning) (scale scores 1–2, not at all likely and slightly likely), “moderate in the previous 12 months, and asked to provide information likelihood” (scale score 3), and “high likelihood” (scale scores about age, gender, and fishing participation of every person in 4–5, very likely and extremely likely). the household. A random sample of individuals who reported To identify constraints that prevent lapsed fishers from fishing in the past but not in the preceding 12 months was asked returning to fishing, respondents were asked if they were interested if they would be willing to participate in a follow-up mail survey in fishing more often than they currently do. Individuals who about why they do not currently participate in fishing. Names and responded affirmatively were then asked to rate their level of addresses were collected from those who agreed. agreement (on the 5-point agreement scale) with 29 statements In total, 55,252 households were contacted, resulting in about possible reasons why they do not fish more often. The 40,687 interviews (74%) in which the respondent answered the statements covered a range of intrapersonal, interpersonal, and initial question about whether anyone in the household had structural constraints and were based on those used previously fished in the previous 12 months and 20,743 interviews (38%) by Fedler and Ditton (2001) and Sutton (2007). Responses for where the respondent provided information about all household each of the 29 statements were subsequently collapsed into a members. Of the 13,845 respondents identified as lapsed fishers, 3-point scale with categories “agree,” “neutral,” and “disagree” 6,191 were asked to participate in the follow-up survey; 2,063 and ranked within each constraint category according to the (33%) agreed. percentage of respondents who agreed with each statement. The follow-up mail survey, a four-page self-administered To explore the influence of demographic variables on reasons questionnaire, was used to collect further data from lapsed for ceasing fishing, effects of ceasing fishing on leisure activity fishers. Survey procedures followed those recommended by and leisure satisfaction, perceived likelihood of returning Dillman (1978). A total of 1,149 completed surveys were to fishing, and constraints preventing resumption of fishing returned. Excluding non-deliverable surveys (n=148), an activity, each of the previously described variables was tested effective response rate of 60% was achieved for the mail survey. for differences across gender, age (measured on a 5-point scale Mail survey participants were asked to report the last time with categories ranging from 15–29 years to 60+ years), and they went fishing and whether they consider themselves to be income (measured on a 5-point scale ranging from < $20,000 active recreational fishers. Respondents who had been fishing to > $79,000 AUD). Variables measuring the effects of ceas- in the previous 12 months and respondents who reported being ing fishing on leisure activity and leisure satisfaction were also active fishers were excluded from further analysis (n=116). tested for differences across categories of length of time since Non-active fishers were asked open-ended questions about the respondent last went fishing (measured with categories < 2 the factors that influenced them to stop fishing and what, if years, 2–5 years, and > 5 years). To test for demographic effects anything, would encourage them to start fishing again. To make on each of the 29 statements about constraints that prevent valid inferences from these open-ended questions, answers were resumption of fishing activity, the response categories were analyzed for content according to Weber (1990). Using content collapsed into a binary variable with categories “agree” and “do analysis, responses to the open-ended question were classified not agree.” Binary logistic regression models were used when the into broad categories according to the factors mentioned in the dependent variable was binary (i.e., reasons for ceasing fishing, response, and inferences were drawn from the frequencies in constraints that prevent resumption of fishing activity), and each category. proportional odds logistic regression models were used when the The effects of ceasing fishing participation on respondents’ dependent variable was ordinal (i.e., effects of ceasing fishing leisure activity were assessed by asking them to rate their level on leisure activity and leisure satisfaction, perceived likelihood of agreement (on a 5-point scale with categories ranging from of returning to fishing). Because the goal of the analysis was 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree) with 3 statements to explore variation across levels of each of the demographic about how their participation in leisure activities has changed variables, separate models were used for each of the demographic since they stopped fishing. The 5-point agree/disagree scale for variables. The demographic analysis involved a large number each statement was subsequently collapsed into a 3-point scale of tests (~140); therefore, only significant (P = < 0.05) results with categories “agree” (scale scores 4–5, agree and strongly are reported. The statistical analysis was conducted with SAS agree), “neutral” (scale score 3), and “disagree” (scale scores Version 9.1. 1–2, strongly disagree, disagree). Respondents were also asked to report changes in level of satisfaction with their overall rec- Results reation activity since they stopped fishing (on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = decreased a lot to 5 = increased a lot). The Description of the sample 5-point scale was subsequently collapsed into a 3-point scale with categories “decreased” (scale categories 1–2, decreased a The sample of lapsed fishers was evenly split between females lot, decreased a little), “stayed the same” (scale score 3), and (51%) and males. Approximately 31% of respondents were under “increased” (scale categories 4–5, increased a little, increased the age of 50 years whereas 30% were aged 60 years or over. Sixty- a lot). six percent of the sample was evenly distributed across the three

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 445 lower income categories (i.e., < $20,000, $20,000–$39,000, and $39,000–$59,000). Table 1. Frequency of reasons cited by lapsed Approximately one-third of respondents fell into each of the categories created to fishers in Queensland for ceasing recreational measure time since last fishing experience (i.e., < 2 years, 2–5 years, and > 5 years; fishing participation. Percent adds to > 100 average time since last fishing experience was 7.5 years). Respondents were asked to because respondents could cite more than one reason. list the recreation activities currently most important to them; the most common responses were sports (including specific responses such as tennis, golf, football, etc., Reasons for ceasing fishing % and unspecified “sports;” 27%), walking (including bushwalking, beachwalking; 26%), exercise/fitness (including gym, aerobics, exercising, cycling; 19%), gardening (14%), reading (8%), and camping (6%). Approximately 12% of the sample listed no Lack of time / other commitments 34 Lack or loss of interest 21 current recreation activities. Poor fishing quality 17 Lack of access to fishing areas 13 Reasons for ceasing fishing participation Lack of fishing partners 11 Poor health or disability 7 Lack of boat or equipment 6 Lack of time and lack of interest were the most frequently cited reasons for ceas- Changed personal circumstances 5 ing fishing participation (Table 1). Most respondents who reported lack of time Cost 5 either gave no reason for their lack of time, or cited other commitments (primarily Weather 5 Too many or too complex fishing regulations 4 work or family related) as reasons for not having time to participate in fishing. Lack Lack of knowledge about fishing 3 or loss of interest in fishing was attributed to a number of factors including: “do not like or enjoy fishing,” “became more interested in other activities,” “do not wish to catch/harm fish,” “find fishing boring,” and “became Figure 1. Lapsed fishers’ level of agreement with statements concerned about the environmental impact of fishing.” Other rea- about changes in their leisure activity since they ceased fishing. sons for ceasing fishing participation cited by more than 10% of respondents were poor fishing quality (including general inability to catch the desired number or size of fish and perceived declines in fishing or environmental quality over time), lack of access to fishing areas (including having moved away from suitable fishing areas, and lack of transportation to fishing areas), and lack of fish- ing partners. Reasons for ceasing fishing participation varied by demographic characteristics. A higher percentage of males cited lack of time (males = 39%; females = 30%; P = 0.007), poor fishing quality (males = 20%; females = 14%; P = 0.01), and fishing regulations (males = 6%; females = 2%; P = 0.002), whereas a higher percent- age of females cited lack of interest (females = 25%; males = 17%; P = 0.001) and lack of fishing partners (females = 17%; males = 4%; P = 0.0001) as reasons for ceasing fishing participation. Age had a positive effect on the percentage of respondents who cited poor health (age< 40 = 1%; age> 59 = 18%; P = 0.0001) and lack of fishing partners (age< 40 = 6%; age> 59 = 13%; P = 0.01), and a nega- tive effect on the percentage who cited lack of interest (age< 29 = 34%; age> 59 = 16%; P = 0.003) and lack of time (age< 29 = 38%; age> 59 = 23%; P = 0.0001) as reasons for ceasing fishing. Income had a negative effect on the percentage of respondents who cited cost (income< $20,000 = 8%; income> $79,000 = 3%; P = 0.01) and poor health (income< $20,000 = 17%; income> $79,000 = 2%; P = 0.0001) and a positive effect on the percentage who cited lack of time

(income< $20,000 = 21%; income> $79,000 = 37%; P = 0.0002) as rea- sons for ceasing fishing.

Effects of ceasing fishing participation on leisure activity

Twenty-seven percent of respondents reported spending less time participating in recreation activities overall since they stopped fish- ing (Figure 1). Fifty-seven percent of respondents reported increas- ing their participation in other activities (i.e., new activities and/or activities in which they already participated) since they stopped fish- ing. Males were more likely than females to report a decrease in over- all recreation activity since ceasing fishing (males = 32%; females = 23%; P = 0.002). There was a positive effect of age on the percentage of respondents who reported a decrease in recreation activity since

446 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Jim Higgs

Figure 2. Lapsed fishers’ self-assessed likelihood of participating ceasing fishing (age< 29 = 21%; age> 59 = 31%; P = 0.007). Length of time since ceasing fishing had a negative effect on the percentage of in recreation fishing in the future. respondents who reported a decrease in overall recreation participa- tion (last fishing< 2 years = 29%; last fishing> 5 years = 22%; P = 0.04), and a positive effect on the percentage who reported increased participa- tion in new recreation activities since they stopped fishing (last fish- ing< 2 years = 31%; last fishing> 5 years = 44%; P = 0.0007). Twenty-eight percent of respondents reported a decrease in their level of satisfaction with their leisure activities since ceasing fish- ing; 21% reported increased leisure satisfaction since they stopped fishing. Males were more likely than females to report decreased lei- sure satisfaction since they stopped fishing (males = 33%; females = 22%; P = 0.001). Age had a positive effect, and income and length of time since ceasing fishing had a negative effect, on the percentage of respondents who reported a decrease in leisure satisfaction with cessation of fishing activity (age< 29 = 19%; age> 59 = 32%; P = 0.03; income< $20,000 = 35%; income> $79,000 = 20%; P = 0.003; last fishing< 2 years = 32%; last fishing> 5 years = 17%; P = 0.0001).

Resumption of fishing activity

A minority of respondents reported a high likelihood that they would go fishing in the next 12 months (15%) or in the next 3–5 years (35%). Males were more likely than females to report a high likeli- hood of going fishing in the next 12 months (males = 22%; females = 12%; P = 0.0001) and in the next 3–5 years (males = 44%; females = 30%; P = 0.0001; Figure 2). Age and time since ceasing fishing had a negative effect on the percentage of respondents who reported a high likelihood of going fishing in the next 12 months (age< 29 = 25%; age> 59 = 16%; P = 0.005; last fishing< 2 years = 34%; last fishing> 5 years = 4%; P = 0.0001) and in the next 3–5 years (age< 29 = 56%; age> 59 = 29%;

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 447 Inability to find fishing partners is a constraint experienced by many female fishers.

Females are less likely than males to return to fishing within 5 years of ceasing their fishing participation.

P = 0.0001; last fishing< 2 years = 58%; last fishing> 5 years = 13%; P don’t always know the regulations for each type of fish I catch” = 0.0001). (61%), “The people I know don’t have time to fish more” Fifty percent of respondents reported that they were inter- (55%), and “I don’t always know the regulations for the area I ested in fishing more often than they currently do. These fish” (54%).E ight of the 10 highest ranked constraints were of respondents’ level of agreement with statements about the the structural variety and two were of the interpersonal vari- interpersonal, intrapersonal, and structural constraints that ety; intrapersonal constraints were generally among the least prevent them from fishing more often are presented in Table 2. important. Constraint statements receiving the highest level of agreement Significant influences of gender, income, and age on constraint were “I have too many work/family commitments” (64%), “I statements are presented in Figures 3–5. Gender had a significant influence on 8 constraint state- Table 2. Level of agreement with statements about factors that constrain lapsed fishers in Queensland from ments, and in all cases, females fishing more often. Only respondents who expressed an interest in fishing more often (50%) answered these were more affected by the questions. constraint than were males.

Level of agreement Constraints with a significant Reason for not fishing more often Disagree Neutral Agree gender effect were primarily either intrapersonal (4 state- Interpersonal constraints ments) or interpersonal (3 state- The people I know don’t have time to fish more 27 18 55 The people I know are not interested in fishing more often 43 20 37 ments) rather than structural (1 I don’t know other people to fish with 55 16 29 statement) (Figure 3). Income The people I know don’t have the necessary fishing skills 59 22 19 had a significant negative effect The people I know don’t have the money to fish more 57 25 18 on 8 constraints (6 structural, 1 The people I know don’t feel its appropriate to fish more 60 28 12 The people I know don’t fish for the species I prefer to catch 66 29 5 intrapersonal, 1 interpersonal), and a positive effect on 1 Intrapersonal constraints (structural) constraint (Figure I don’t have the necessary fishing skills 63 17 20 I believe increasing my fishing activity would be bad for the resource 71 17 12 4). Age had positive effect on I don’t like to kill fish 71 18 11 4 structural constraints and a Catching fish causes too much injury to the fish 70 19 11 negative effect on 1 structural I don’t feel it is appropriate to fish more often 69 22 9 and 1 interpersonal constraint At times, fishing can be stressful 80 11 9 When fishing, I feel uncomfortable or self conscious 85 10 5 (Figure 5). Forty-two percent of Structural constraints lapsed fishers responded to the I have too many work/family commitments 21 15 64 I don’t always know the regulations for each type of fish I catch 22 17 61 open-ended question about I don’t always know the regulations for the area I fish 26 20 54 what would encourage them I don’t have access to fishing opportunities close to home 42 16 42 to resume fishing. The most Other leisure activities take up my time 37 22 41 commonly cited factors were Fishing regulations are too confusing 36 28 36 Fishing areas are too crowded 41 28 31 having more time or fewer I can’t catch enough fish to suit me 47 22 31 commitments (cited by 18% The cost of fishing equipment and supplies is too expensive 45 27 28 of the total sample), followed There are too many regulations on fishing 40 32 28 by someone to fish with (12%) Fishing facilities (boat ramps, jetties, etc.) are poorly developed and/or maintained 43 34 23 I can’t afford to fish more often 56 21 23 and improved fishing quality Fishing regulations are too strict 42 36 22 (11%); (Table 3). Males were The areas I like to fish have been closed to fishing 46 39 15 more likely than females to I don’t have the physical ability to fish more 76 12 12 cite more time (males = 22%;

448 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g females = 15%; P = 0.01) and improved fishing quality (males = centage of respondents who cited lower cost (income< $20,000 = 6%; 15%; females = 7%; P = 0.0001) whereas females were more likely income> $79,000 = 2%; P = 0.005). There was no effect of age on than males to cite someone to fish with (males = 7%; females = probability of citing any of the factors that would influence respon- 16%; P = 0.0001). Income had a positive effect on the percent- dents to resume fishing. age of respondents who cited more time (income< $20,000 = 11%; income> $79,000 = 20%; P = 0.01) and a negative effect on the per- Discussion

Figure 3. Significant P( = < 0.05 for all) relationships between gender The two reasons for ceasing fishing cited most frequently by and fishing constraints. lapsed fishers in Queensland—lack of time and loss of inter- est—have been identified previously as constraints leading to a reduction or cessation of recreational fishing participation (Ritter et al. 1992; Fedler and Ditton 2001; Sutton 2007). Although these factors are traditionally seen as exogenous to fisheries management, agencies and NGOs that have an objec- tive of maintaining or increasing recreational fishing partici- pation rates will need to find ways to counteract these factors. Whereas an individual’s time and interest level for fishing are not under direct management control, the recreational fishing sector can learn to be more effective at competing for people’s time and interest for leisure activities. Improved outreach and marketing strategies that promote the varied social, psycho- logical, physical, and overall health benefits of recreational fishing may be one strategy towards maintaining a higher pub- lic awareness of recreational fishing and keeping fishing com- petitive against other recreation activities. Other reasons cited for quitting fishing (i.e., poor fishing quality, lack of access, insufficient knowledge about fishing and regulations) can be addressed directly through management actions. Results sug- gest that strategies aimed at alleviating constraints under direct management control might be more effective if they were designed to also help increase interest in fishing and/or reduce the time necessary for participation. Half of the lapsed fishers surveyed reported that they were interested in resuming their fishing participation; however, 70% of those interested in returning to fishing believed it was unlikely that they would do so in the next 12 months. Clearly, constraints perceived as being un-negotiable were intervening between these individuals’ desire to go fishing and their abil- ity to participate (Jackson et al. 1993). As would be expected from individuals who have already participated in fishing and still desire to do so, these constraints were primarily structural (e.g., too many other commitments) and interpersonal (e.g.,

Males are more likely than females to experience decreased leisure activity and satisfaction when they cease fishing.

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 449 ing ways to remove the constraints faced by this group would Lack of knowledge about current size and bag be a useful starting point (Fedler and Ditton 2001). Of par- limits prevents many ticular note are constraints related to a lack of knowledge lapsed fishers from of fishing regulations, which were identified as a factor by a returning to fishing. majority of those who desire to resume participation. Since 2003, recreational fisheries in Queensland have undergone numerous regulatory changes including seasonal closures for a range of species, new size and bag limits for many popular recreational species, and the promulgation of spatial fishing closures in response to national and international commit- ments to the protection of marine biodiversity. Consequently, it is not surprising that those who have not participated in fishing recently felt constrained by lack of knowledge about current regulations. Finding ways to get information to lapsed fishers about recent management changes, the kinds of fishing activities that are still permitted, and where those activities are still permitted would help counter constraints regarding lack of fishing partners) rather than intrapersonal (i.e., lack of lack of knowledge about regulations. interest; Crawford and Godbey 1987). Although most lapsed fishers were able to compensate for Lapsed fishers who still desire to participate in recreational their loss of fishing activity by increasing their participation fishing comprise approximately 25% of the Queensland popu- in other activities, about one-quarter of respondents reported lation aged five years or older. If fisheries managers or other a decrease in their overall recreational activity and leisure sat- stakeholders in Queensland are interested in reversing the isfaction since they stopped fishing. This result suggests that trend of declining recreational fishing participation, -find displacement from fishing can negatively impact an individu-

Figure 4. Significant P( = < 0.05 for all) relationships between income and fishing constraints.

450 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g al’s leisure lifestyle. Conversely, about Table 3. Frequency of factors cited that would encourage lapsed fishers in Queensland to resume one-fifth of lapsed fishers reported their fishing activity. Respondents could cite more than one reason. increased leisure satisfaction since they stopped fishing, suggesting that Factors that would encourage resumption of fishing % these individuals will be unlikely More time / fewer commitments 18 to return to fishing if they continue Someone to fish with 12 to receive a higher level of benefits Better fishing 11 elsewhere (Ditton and Sutton 2004). Better access to fishing areas 6 Access to fishing gear or boat 6 Collectively, these results suggest Lower cost 4 that efforts to retain current fishers More knowledge about fishing 3 and reactivate lapsed fishers might be Fewer or less complicated regulations 2 Better weather 2 most effective if they were focused on Other (incl. better facilities, more interest, changes in personal circumstances, more ability) 6 those individuals who are least likely to obtain similar or greater benefits elsewhere. Results indicate that, in Queensland, individuals least likely to obtain similar or greater have reported lower leisure satisfaction and an intention to benefits elsewhere are males, older individuals, and individu- resume fishing in the future. Consequently, recruitment and als with lower incomes. Likewise, individuals who were out of retention efforts will be more effective if aimed at recent drop- fishing for more than two years were more likely than recent outs and/or current fishers who are experiencing constraints dropouts to have taken up new activities, and less likely to that are likely to lead to a discontinuation of fishing activity. Consistent with the results of previous studies (Godbey 1985; Figure 5. Significant P( = < 0.05 for all) relationships between age and fishing constraints. Thomas and Peterson 1993; Fedler and Ditton 2001; Sutton 2007), demographic character- istics were found to have influ- enced lapsed fishers’ reasons for dropping out of fishing and the constraints that prevent them from resuming their fishing participation. Furthermore, the types of constraints influenced by the three demographic variables differed, with gender primarily influencing the perception of interpersonal and intrapersonal constraints, and age and income primarily influencing the per- ception of structural constraints. These results support the notion that females face different types of constraints on their leisure activity than males (Jackson and Henderson 1995; Clark 1996), and highlight the importance of including constraints relevant to females (i.e., non-structural constraints) and other demo- graphic groups in studies of fish- ing constraints (Sutton 2007). From a management perspec- tive, these results demonstrate that outreach and recruitment efforts must consider the needs of different demographic groups based on the constraints they are likely to be experiencing. In Queensland, data are avail- able that allow for identifica- tion of the demographic groups

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 451 with the largest decreases in fishing participation since is known about non-fishers’ attitudes and values regarding 1996 (McInnes 2006). This information, combined with the recreational fishing, the reasons why they have not been results of the constraints analysis in this study, will help focus attracted to fishing, or the constraints new recruits must outreach and recruitment efforts on those constraints and negotiate before they can participate. A study of non-fishers demographic groups where such efforts are likely to have the in Queensland would give managers a better understanding of greatest impact. the issues surrounding recruiting new people to the activity This study was initiated in response to a sharp decline in of recreational fishing, and provide vital information towards recreational fishing participation in Queensland over the gaining a comprehensive understanding of the factors that preceding 10 years. The results of this study, combined with influence recreational fishing participation rates. the results of a previous study of active recreational fishers (Sutton 2007), provide a great deal of infor- mation about the constraints faced by both active and lapsed fishers in Queensland. Collectively, these results should provide information Maintaining fishing quality that will enable fisheries managers and promoting the social, psychological, and health and other stakeholders to develop benefits of fishing would help strategies to reduce the fishing keep fishing competitive against dropout rate and encourage lapsed other recreational activities. fishers to resume their fishing par- ticipation. However, any compre- hensive strategy aimed at stabilizing or increasing fishing participation rates must also consider poten- tial new recruits to the activity. In Queensland, approximately 27% of the population aged five years or older has never participated in recreational fishing (2004 data; McInnes 2006), making this group a significant source of potential new recruits. Unfortunately, little

References Jackson, E. L., D. W. Crawford, and G. Godbey. 1993. Negotiation of leisure constraints. Leisure Sciences 15:1-11. Backman, S. J. 1991. An investigation of the relationship between Jackson, E. L., and K. A. Henderson. 1995. Gender-based analy- activity loyalty and perceived constraints. Journal of Leisure sis of leisure constraints. Leisure Sciences 17:32-51. Research 23(4):332-344. McInnes, K. L. 2006. 2004 biennial recreational fishing telephone Clark, D. J. 1996. The effects of constraints on participation survey of Queensland residents. Queensland Department of and substitution behavior in recreational fishing. Unpublished Primary Industries and Fisheries, Brisbane, Australia. Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station. Ritter, C., R. B. Ditton, and R. K. Riechers. 1992. Constraints to Crawford, D. W., and G. Godbey. 1987. Reconceptualizing barriers to family leisure. Leisure Sciences 9:119-127. sport fishing: implications for fisheries management. Fisheries Crawford, D. W., E. L. Jackson, and G. Godbey. 1991. A 17(4):16-19. hierarchical model of leisure constraints. Leisure Sciences Sutton, S. G. 2007. Constraints on recreational fishing 13:309-320. participation in Queensland, Australia. Fisheries 32(2):73-83. Dillman, D. A. 1978. Mail and telephone surveys: the total design Thomas, C. L., and T. A. Peterson. 1993. Becoming an outdoors- method. John Wiley and Sons, New York. woman. Women in Natural Resources 15(3):16-21. Ditton, R. B., and S. G. Sutton. 2004. Substitutability in recrea- USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2006. 2006 National tional fishing. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 9: 87-102. survey of fishing, hunting, and wildlife-associated recreation. Fedler, A. J., and R. B. Ditton. 2001. Dropping out and U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. dropping in: a study of factors for changing recreational Weber, R. P. 1990. Basic content analysis. 2nd ed. Sage, Newbury fishing participation. North American Journal of Fisheries Park, California. Management 21:283-292. DFO (Fisheries and Oceans Canada). 2007. Survey of recreational Wightman, R., S. G. Sutton, B. E., Matthews, K. Gillis, J. C. fishing in Canada 2005. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Colman, and J. R. Samuelsen. 2008. Recruiting new anglers: Economic Analysis and Statistics, Ottawa. driving forces, constraints and examples of success. Pages 303- Godbey, G. 1985. Nonuse of public leisure services: a model. 323 in O. Aas, ed. Global challenges in recreational fisheries. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 3:1-12. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.

452 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Column: Gus Rassam Director’s line AFS Executive Director Rassam can be contacted at [email protected].

A Community of Professionals…

AFS Past President Bill Franzin the Rogue River was 6 years ago. It at Cornell University and I was a came up with the idea that we was only 16 lbs., but almost knocked graduate student. should recognize and honor me off my balance several times members of long standing in AFS. before I could beach it. It was then —Dennis Riecke Especially designed pins were that I realized I was being foolish. commissioned for 25+ years of I believe that the last AFS meet- membership, 50+ years of mem- ing that I attended was in 1998, at ...This may seem crazy but the bership, and those members who Charlotte, North Carolina. After that serve on the Governing Board. fact that I joined in 1982 has great I really started slowing down….I still significance to me. I was a very poor read the bulletin and the journals, The following are some of M.S. student and I recognized that but fisheries is becoming so high the comments we received in to be a professional I needed to be tech that I can hardly keep up at my response to notification of this in AFS so I spent my meager funds (I honor. To me, these comments age (77). It is a far cry from when I was on a $300/mo stipend) to join. confirm once again the rich diver- started my career in Alaska in 1952. By 1985 I was a wealthy :-) Ph.D. stu- sity of our membership and the dent at Ohio State. —Tony Novotny value people attribute to their membership in AFS. Another —Donna Parrish striking common thread: the importance of recruitment by This is a nice thing. The now professors of their students to extinct Pacific Fishery Biologists I had not planned on attend- professional society membership. group for fisheries persons from ing the Nashville Meeting, but was Finally, what a wealth of experi- Alaska/Washington/Oregon/ expecting to attend the meeting in ence and knowledge we have in California/W. Canada had both Pittsburgh. My career has focused our AFS family! Mossback and Silverback recogni- onthe business of aquaculture— I think that I became a life mem- tions for long-time members. I had much of it in the private sector. As ber in the sixties, co-founded the reached the first distinction before such, the incentive to participate North Pacific International Chapter they went belly up in 2004. I guess in AFS has not been very strong (NPIC), and was president of the I’m getting old enough for AFS. through the years. I have been NPIC, president of the Western a member of AFS since 1975 as Division (1985), co-founder of the —Kevan Urquhart an undergraduate student at AFS Computer Users Section, various Pennsylvania State University. Robert Section offices, and recipient of the Butler was the faculty who encour- Distinguished Service Award (1988). aged me to join. If only I had taken I think this is a great idea. Prior to In 1988, I retired from NMFS, and advantage of the lifetime member- this effort, I believe an AFS mem- spent the next 10 years developing ship available at that time! I look and testing injectable fish vaccines ber had to wait till they reached forward to attending the meeting in for the international aquaculture their 50th year of membership to Pittsburgh. Kyle Hartman and Chad industry…. Amongst the things that get recognized for such. 25 years Pierskalla will have some information I miss are AFS involvement, especially is a quarter of a century and more to present from our project. Richard with the NPIC, salmon fishing (I have than half of the time of a typical Soderberg has recruited me to help my 65 lb. king mounted above my working career (40–45 years). I look with scoring student presentations. desk), and the annual canoe trip with forward to receiving my 25-year pin. It is close enough to Morgantown, my partner to Yellowstone I will wear it with pride and honor. West Virginia, that commuting may Lake for the great Yellowstone cut- Actually it will be 25 years since the throats. My balance is awful, and the last date I attended a parent Society Continued on page 463 last spring Chinook that I caught on Annual Meeting. The year was 1984

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 453 Letters: To The editor

bladder characteristics are species-specific rather than Does venting promote family-specific and contribute to the variation reported in survival from rapid decompression. Red grouper, a robust, survival of released fish? truly benthic species, have a capacious thin-membraned swim bladder necessarily capable of holding a large Data on reef fish and rock fish do not support Wilde’s volume of swim bladder gases, which is subject to large conclusion that venting kills fish and should be prohibited ruptures. Their swim bladders have less overall rete and (Fisheries 34[1]:20-28). Barotrauma kills fish; venting does an intimate association of rete, large blood vessels, and not. Although venting is not a panacea and does nothing gas gland cells, resulting in increased hemorrhaging that for emboli, it does not cause mortality in red grouper, red contribute to fatal injuries during rapid decompression. snapper, vermilion snapper, and other reef fish species. Red snapper, a more streamlined schooling species, have Mortality that results from trauma caused by changes in smaller, thicker swim bladders, hold less swim bladder gas, pressure is variable, depending not only on depth but on and have more rete, providing more efficient gas exchange fish species, fish and swim bladder size, and predation. resulting in less hemorrhaging and bladders is prone to Few studies have addressed healing and presumed fish smaller tears. Although many benthic species experience died because they were not recaptured. Many reef fish more difficulty with barotrauma at shallower depths than not suffering from severe barotrauma heal. The fish swim pelagic species, if they can recompress benthic species bladder’s inner most layer, the submucosa, heals suffi- returned to habitat depth survive the 2–4 day swim blad- ciently to be functional within 2–4 days. All three layers heal within a month, leaving a line of scar tissue. der healing process better than pelagic species because Red grouper (n = 322 vented; n = 192 not vented) and they are returning to their natural habitat. A pelagic spe- red snapper (n = 441 vented; n = 90 not vented) tagged cies with a ruptured swim bladder cannot maintain itself and released by private recreational and recreational- in the water column for very long. A small, water column for-hire fishermen in the shallow water control group species would be unable to maintain its position and hover (fish caught on hook-and-line at 21 m), a depth chosen for two days to accommodate swim bladder healing; because 100% of both species survived barotrauma in instead, it would sink to the bottom and become subject laboratory hyperbaric chamber experiments, showed no to bottom predators. significant difference in survival for vented and not vented In a 17-year reef tagging program in the Gulf of Mexico red grouper (P = 0.8671) or red snapper (P = 0.8376). This where venting experiments were incorporated, multiple finding indicates venting did not enhance survival or cause recaptures showed that not only do these fishes survive mortality at this depth. Most (69%) red grouper (n = 26) the catch-and-release process but show high fishing effort. tagged and released (3.7–80.5 m) off private recreational Eliminating the minimum size limit over all depths fished and recreational-for-hire vessels that recruited into the may be ill advised as data (histology and cage studies) show offshore commercial fishery were vented and recaptured smaller fish survive barotrauma better than larger fish, except after 65–868 days by commercial fishers. Most (81%) in areas of high predation. Additionally, changing hook size undersized red grouper recaptures (n = 42) from capture may succeed in reducing the capture of undersized fish with depths (24.4 – 80.5 m) originally tagged and released by small mouths but would be ineffective for fish species with commercial long-line (n = 27), electric reel (n = 5), and large gapes. rod and reel (n = 12) were vented before release. Venting Venting fish at sea may provide little or no difference is often the option of last resort when fish are unable to in fish survival; however, laboratory hyperbaric chamber submerge and might provide a slight survival edge for fish experiments on red grouper and red snapper suggest vent- caught in deep water if fish are immediately vented upon ing can provide an edge for survival depending on species capture before emboli have the chance to form. and capture depth, especially for fishes caught at depths Research results on Gulf of Mexico reef fishes agree greater than 1 atm but held at 1 atm, such as for labora- with recently published work from Oregon and California tory experiments, collection of aquaculture brood stock, on survival of various rock fish species. Results suggest aquarium displays, and live fishing tournaments. Venting differences in depth-induced mortality are related to swim has proved useful for various commercial rock fish species bladder morphology, fish anatomy, and physiology. Swim caught off Oregon and shipped alive (two days to a week)

454 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g to California for live markets. Prohibiting venting would overall effect on survival. However, they did not expressly have a deleterious impact on all these activities. examine the critical issue of whether survival of vented —Karen Burns fish varies with capture depth. (I thank Karen for providing (former manager, me with a copy of her dissertation so that I could assess Fish Biology Program, Center for Fisheries Enhancement, their data.) Mote Marine Laboratory, Sarasota, Florida), As noted by Burns et al., interspecific differences in John Stevely swim bladder morphology may affect survival of fish (marine agent, suffering barotrauma. However, the relevant question is Florida Sea Grant, University of Florida, Palmetto), not whether the absolute survival rate of some species is Steve Theberge greater, or less, but whether venting differentially affects (former agent, survival. My analyses compared survival rates of vented Oregon State University Sea Grant, Astoria), and and unvented fish using relative risk, which thus allows a Chuck Adams comparison of venting effects across species, regardless of (marine economics specialist, Florida Sea Grant, University of Florida, Gainesville) habitat, swim bladder morphology, etc. The Australian reef fishes included in my analyses are instructive in this regard. Among those species, survival of fish suffering barotrauma The author responds— varied considerably, but there was no evidence that vent- ing differentially affected survival of any species. Understanding the effects of barotrauma on fish and Burns et al. observe that, “Venting is often the option development of effective means of abatement are criti- of last resort when fish are unable to submerge and might cal to management of many fisheries. Thus, I am grateful provide a slight survival edge for fish caught in deep to Karen Burns, John Stevely, Steve Theberge, and Chuck water...” This option of last resort has, at best, no survival Adams for the keeping alive the discussion of this impor- affect. It may serve to get fish below the surface, but it tant topic. provides no survival edge. The available data are clear on Burns et al. state that available data on reef fish and this point. Further, although there are several accounts of rock fish do not support my conclusion that venting kills fish left at the surface being attacked by predators, tag- fish and, thus, should be prohibited. My analyses included ging studies in particular would be expected to show, but results for several species of reef and rock fishes and do not, increased survival of vented fish, if predation on showed that (1) venting did not increase survival of fish floating fish decreased survival of unvented individuals. suffering barotrauma and (2) venting was associated with Burns et al. conclude by stating their concern that pro- a progressive decrease in survival as fish were captured hibition of venting would preclude its use in a small num- from increasingly deeper waters. This latter result was ber of special cases in which it may be beneficial, such as largely due to relatively poorer survival of vented reef in promoting short-term survival of various commercially- fishes, which included most of the species mentioned by caught rock fish, or collection of fish for laboratory experi- Burns et al. The available data support only one explana- ments, brood stock, aquarium displays, etc. In the case of tion: some fish died as a result of being vented. the commercially-caught rock fish, there is no issue. Those I did not recommend the prohibition of venting, per se. fish are harvested and not released. Venting regulations I suggested that instead of mandating that released fish be vented, as is now required in the Gulf of Mexico, that are directed toward fish that are going to be released. In venting should be prohibited. My point is this: if one is the other cases cited by Burns et al., I am quite sure that going to regulate the manner in which fish are released, venting, if defensible, could be allowed by permit. But, the regulation ought to be one that promotes, rather than again, I did not advocate the prohibition of venting. decreases, survival. In the end, Burns et al. and I are in general agreement As I previously argued, there is essentially no evidence that (1) fish die from barotrauma and (2) venting does to support the notion that venting promotes survival of little, if anything, to promote the survival of fish suffering released fish. This is consistent with the results reported from barotrauma. by Burns et al., who also demonstrate that venting has no —Gene Wilde

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 455 NEWS: AFS UNITS

Southern Division Spring Meeting in New Orleans Hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit the Gulf Coast in 2005 like a bad dream and memories of the devasta- tion have not passed quickly. Many lives were lost, billions of dollars in property destroyed, and signs of the devastation still haunt the region. In fishery terms, millions of dollars worth of infrastructure and equip- ment were lost, people displaced, work activities severely disrupted, and habitats destroyed. However, with the help of the Southern Division AFS (SDAFS), the Louisiana Chapter was able to hold its annual meeting in January 2006. At that Satellite image of Hurricane Katrina prior to landfall on the Gulf Coast. meeting, the idea of hosting the Southern Division’s annual meet- of Asian Carp, while a session on Gus Rassam and AFS President Bill ing (called our Spring Meeting) was Poster Presentation Techniques was Franzin spoke at both events, with introduced. At the subsequent 2007 sponsored by the SDAFS Student AFS President Elect Don Jackson also business meeting, the Louisiana Affairs Committee. On Saturday and attending. SDAFS President Steve Chapter overwhelmingly voted to Sunday, a total of 195 oral presenta- McMullin’s two goals for the year host the 2009 SDAFS Spring Meeting tions were given during 7 concur- were to establish a rainy day fund to in New Orleans. rent sessions (including From 15–18 January 2009, the 9 special symposia) Louisiana Chapter was able to place and 27 posters were many bad dreams behind and host on display. Podcasts the SDAFS Spring Meeting at the of selected presen- Royal Sonesta Hotel on Bourbon tations are avail- Street in New Orleans. Despite reces- able for viewing at sion-induced travel restrictions, the http://129.15.97.26/ meeting was attended by 388 fully sdafs/podcast/ registered students and professionals index2009.htm, and 20 one-day participants. Seven thanks to the dedi- technical committees, including the cated efforts of Greg newly formed Alligator Gar Technical Summers. Committee, met on Thursday and The SDAFS Executive were followed by a Leadership Committee Meeting Workshop led by Steve McMullin, was held Friday morn- SDAFS president. Four workshops ing and the annual were held on Friday including Business Meeting Alligator Gar Ageing Techniques, later that evening; F.A.S.T., and Ploidy Determination AFS Executive Director Quenton Fontenot, Lousiana Chapter AFS, accepts a Resolution of Thanks from Steve McMullin for the hard work of the Chapter and a successful Spring Meeting.

456 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g increase the Division’s depressed Finally, SDAFS President McMullin our wonderful sponsors: the U.S. Fish cash reserves (accomplished) and to installed a new cohort of officers: and Wildlife Service, the Barataria- increase AFS membership within the Cecil Jennings (president), Fred Terrebonne National Estuary Program Southern Division. Steve initiated an Janssen (president elect), Steve and Foundation, Duke Energy, Annual Membership Challenge to Lochmann (vice president), and Dave Georgia Power, Smith-Root, Hach, provide the SDAFS Chapter with the Coughlan (re-elected as secretary- highest percentage of AFS members treasurer). Advanced Telemetry Systems, and with a $250 donation to the AFS Visiting fishery professionals were South Carolina Sea Grant. The fund of their choice. A travelling entertained by the Don Fontenot Louisiana Chapter extends our engraved plaque will list the winning Cajun Band (no known relation to Quenton Fontenot!) and feasted greatest gratitude and thanks to Chapters. The Texas Chapter was on jambalaya at the Student Social the individuals, Chapters, Sections, the inaugural winner of the SDAFS Friday evening. The Saturday banquet Divisions, and parent Society for their Membership Challenge with 69% of included red beans and rice, gumbo, their members belonging to the par- outpouring of support and continu- pasta-jambalaya, marinated crab fin- ous encouragement immediately ent Society. gers, boiled shrimp, boiled crawfish, The awards for Texas kept com- and oysters on the half-shell. Music, following the devastating storms of ing as the Outstanding Achievement including a traditional New Orleans 2005. Without the support provided Award went to Dave Terre, Texas Second Line, was provided by the by SDAFS, the Louisiana Chapter Parks and Wildlife Department. Rebirth Brass Band—a true New could not have hosted the 2009 The Outstanding Large Chapter Orleans original band. Considering Spring Meeting. Award went to the Texas Chapter. all the nighttime diversions in New The Outstanding Student Subunit Orleans, a good time was had by all! Award went to North Carolina State Of course the meeting could not —Quenton Fontenot and University. have been held without the help of Dave Coughlan

Steve McMullin presents the first SDAFS Membership Newly installed SDAFS President Cecil Jennings recognizes Challenge plaque to Ken Kurzawski of Texas Parks and the hard work of outgoing President Steve McMullin with a Wildlife. fine bottle of aged single malt scotch.

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 457 OBITUARY: James Arthur Roy Hamilton

Salmon biologist

James Arthur Roy Hamilton, 90, died on the restoration of sockeye salmon on the of the founding 29 May 2009 in Comox, British Columbia, Fraser River. members in 1948 from complications following a fall. Born He moved with his wife and sons to of the Pacific in Farmlingham, England, he moved to Beaverton, Oregon, in 1956, where he Fisheries Biologists and in 1959 co-founded New Westminster, British Columbia, with accepted a position as fisheries biologist the Association of Power Biologists. his mother, father, brother, and two sisters. for Pacific Power and Light. He remained He and his wife moved to Comox in After receiving his B.A. and M.A. from the there for 24 years performing fish research 1999 where they could be close to their University of British Columbia, he went principally focused on salmon protection. summer residence on Denman Island, his on to finish his doctorate at the University He was an active member of his church, favorite family retreat. Donations in his of Washington. He was employed in fish charities, and business associations, memory can be made to the Canadian research activities for the International including serving as the president of the Cancer Society, Courtenay, BC, Canada Pacific Salmon and Fish Commission in American Fisheries Society’s North Pacific 168554. British Columbia and did work related to International Chapter. He was also one ­—Frank Shrier

Hallprint

Sonotronics

458 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Pacific Salmon Environmental and Life History Models Advancing Science for Sustainable Salmon in the Future

Edited by: E. Eric Knudsen and J. Hal Michael, Jr.

464 pages List price: $69.00 AFS Member price: $48.00 Item Number: 540.71P Published August 2009

TO ORDER: Online: www.afsbooks.org

American Fisheries Society c/o Books International P.O. Box 605 Herndon, VA 20172 Phone: 703-661-1570 Fax: 703-996-1010 Many Pacific salmon and anadromous trout populations are in chronic decline. An important aspect of salmon management is an understanding of the factors that drive salmon population pro- duction and the ability to predict run sizes. Advanced simulation methods are needed for better describing and understanding the complex interactions between salmonids and their environment and improved decision-making about the effects of human activities on their productivity. This book presents recent progress in modeling tools that have practical application for estimating full production capacity, determining appropriate harvest levels, and providing in- formation essential for habitat remediation.

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 459 American Fisheries Society: 140th Annual Meeting

12–16 Sept. 2010, 1st Call for Papers Pittsburgh www.fisheries.org

tart planning your trip to Pitts- speaker introduction and questions). All oral presentations are strongly discouraged. burgh for the AFS 140th Annual presenters are expected to deliver PowerPoint Symposium proposals must be submitted by Meeting! The meeting’s theme, “Merging Our presentations. Presenters must bring their Pow- 8 January 2010. All symposium proposal sub- SDeeper Currents,” couldn’t be more appropri- erPoint file to the meeting on CD or USB flash missions must be made using the AFS online ate given the merging of two great rivers to memory stick by 7 p.m. the evening before symposium proposal submission form, which form the Ohio River in the heart of Pittsburgh, their presentation. Laptop computers and LCD is available on the AFS website (www.fisher- just blocks from the meeting venue. The theme projectors will be provided and technicians will ies.org). If you do not receive confirmation by encompasses not only the merging of waters, be available to help. 15 January 2010, please contact Dave Argent but also the melding of new and exciting ad- Traditionally, symposia have been dominated at ([email protected]). The Program Com- vances in and management, by oral presentations and sometimes supple- mittee will review all symposium proposals and the human dimensions and common val- mented by posters. The Pittsburgh ’10 Program and notify organizers of acceptance or refusal ues that bring us together professionally. Committee is considering following the exam- by 5 February 2010. If accepted, organizers AFS 2010 will be from 12-16 September 2010, ple set at the Ottawa and Nashville meetings must submit a complete list of all confirmed at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center and allowing “Speed Presentations” coupled presentations and titles by 26 February 2010. and neighboring Westin Convention Center with posters to shorten the time required for Symposium abstracts (in the same format as Hotel, in downtown Pittsburgh where you can symposia and enhance interactions. This new contributed abstracts; see below) are due by 5 easily fish in the Allegheny River, stroll along format elevates the profile of symposium post- March 2010. its banks, or engage in a morning venture of ers through a “Speed Presentation Subsession” Format for kayaking. The center is the first and largest cer- that provides a time slot for short (i.e., 3-min- tified “green” convention center in the world ute) oral presentations, followed by dedicated Symposium Proposals and is the only meeting venue to be awarded viewing of symposium posters. Speed presenta- Submit using AFS online the Gold LEED (Leadership in Energy and Envi- tions serve, in essence, as “advertisements” for symposium submission form. ronmental Design) by the U.S. Green Building posters (and the people doing new and inter- When submitting your abstract include the Council. Off-site activities will vary from sched- esting work). They are an exciting new way to uled conference events in locations such as the following: disseminate information and foster one-on-one 1. Symposium title:Brief but descriptive. Carnegie Museum to individual excursions into interactions among symposium participants. the surrounding countryside to fish the region’s 2. Organizer(s): Provide name, address, tele- streams for trout and smallmouth bass. We Symposia phone number, fax number, and e-mail ad- look forward to seeing you there! dress of each organizer. Indicate by an aster- The Program Committee invites proposals for isk the name of the main contact person. General Information symposia. Topics must be of general interest 3. Description: In 300 words or less, describe to AFS members. Topics related to the meeting Aquatic resource professionals are invited to the topic addressed by the proposed sympo- theme will receive priority. Symposium organiz- submit symposia proposals and abstracts for sium, the objective of the symposium, and ers are responsible for recruiting presenters, papers in a range of topics and disciplines. the value of the symposium to AFS members soliciting their abstracts, and directing them to Participation by scientists at all levels and back- and participants. submit their abstracts through the AFS online grounds, especially students, is encouraged. 4. Format and time requirement: Indicate the abstract submission form. A symposium should mix of formats (oral and poster). State the The scientific program includes two types of include a minimum of 10 presentations and time required for regular oral presentations sessions: Symposia (oral and poster presenta- we encourage organizers to limit their requests (i.e., 20 minutes per speaker) and the time tions that focus on a single topic) and Contrib- to one-day symposia (about 20 oral presenta- required for speed presentations and poster uted Papers (oral and poster presentations on tions). Regular oral presentations are limited viewing (3 minutes per speaker plus 1 hour any relevant topic). to 20 minutes, but double time slots (i.e., 40 of poster viewing). Oral presentations are limited to 20 minutes minutes) may be offered to keynote speakers. 5. Chairs: Supply name(s) of individual(s) who (15 minutes for presentation plus 5 minutes for Symposia with less than 15 or more than 20 will chair the symposium.

460 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 6. Presentation requirements: We encourage Ecology, Freshwater Fisheries Management, speakers to use PowerPoint for presenta- Genetics, Habitat and Water Quality, Human tions. All Mac-based presentations must be Dimensions, Marine Fish Ecology, Marine Fish- converted to PC format prior to the meeting. eries Management, Native Fishes, Physiology, Presentations in other software programs Policy, Population Dynamics, Statistics and must be approved prior to acceptance. Modeling, Species Specific (specify), and Other 7. Audiovisual requirements: LCD projectors (specify). Including this information in your and laptops will be available in every room. submission will help the Program Committee Other audiovisual equipment needed for the assign your talk, if accepted, to the most appro- symposium will be considered, but computer priate session. projection is strongly encouraged. ontacts Late submissions will not be accepted. AFS 8. Special seating requests:Standard rooms does not waive registration fees for presenters General Meeting Co-Chairs will be arranged theatre-style. Please indicate at symposia, workshops, or contributed paper Leroy Young special seating requests (for example, “after sessions. All presenters and meeting attendees C PA Fish & Boat Commission the break, a panel discussion with seating for must pay registration fees. Registration forms will [email protected] 10 panel members will be needed”). be available on the AFS website (www.fisheries. 814/359-5177 9. List of authors: Please supply information in org) in May 2010; register early for cost savings. David M. Day the following format: PA Fish & Boat Commission Presenters: 1.______Format for [email protected] 2.______717/346-8137 Tentative title: 1.______Submitted Abstracts Local Arrangements Chair 2.______For abstracts submitted to Confirmed: (yes/no) 1.______a Symposium Rick Spear 2.______PA Dept. of Environmental Protection [email protected] Format: (regular or speed) 1.______1. Enter Symposium title: ______412/442-5874 2.______2. Format: (oral or speed) ______Name of presentation : 1.______(accompanied by poster) Program Co-Chairs: 2.______3. For abstracts submitted as a Contributed Pat Mazik 10. Sponsor(s), if applicable. Paper: Enter 2 choices for topic: U.S. Geological Survey/ ______West Virginia Cooperative Fish and Wildlife (Note: A sponsor is not required.) ______Research Unit [email protected] 2.______4. Specify format: Oral—preferred, or poster—acceptable) ______304/293-4943 Contributed Oral and For all abstracts Kyle Hartman Poster Papers West Virginia University Title: An example abstract for the AFS 2010 An- [email protected] The program committee invites abstracts for nual Meeting 304/293-4797 presentations (oral and poster) at contributed Authors: Contributed Papers Subcommittee Co-Chair: paper sessions. Authors must indicate their Hartman, Kyle. West Virginia University, 322 Per- preferred presentation format: (1) oral only, (2) Kyle Hartman cival Hall, Morgantown, West Virginia 26506; poster only, (3) oral preferred, but poster accept- West Virginia University 304-293-4797; [email protected] [email protected] able. Only one oral presentation will be accepted Mazik, Patricia. USGS/West Virginia Cooperative 304/293-4797 for each senior author. Poster submissions are Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, 322 Percival Joe Margraf encouraged because of the limited time available Hall, West Virginia University, Morgantown, for oral presentations. The program will include a U.S. Geological Survey/ West Virginia 26506; 304-293-4943; pmaz- Alaska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit dedicated poster session to encourage discussion [email protected] [email protected] between poster authors and attendees. Presenter: Kyle Hartman 907/474-6044 Abstracts for contributed oral and poster papers Abstract: Abstracts are used by the Program Symposia Subcommittee Chair: Committee to evaluate and select papers for must be received by 5 February 2010. Dave Argent All submissions must be made using the AFS on- inclusion in the scientific and technical ses- California University of PA line abstract submission form, which is available sions of the 2010 AFS Annual Meeting. An [email protected] on the AFS website (www.fisheries.org). When informative abstract contains a statement of 724/938-1529 the problem and its significance, study objec- submitting your abstract: Posters Subcommittee Chair: • Use a brief but descriptive title, avoiding ac- tives, principal findings and application, and it conforms to the prescribed format. Mike Kaller ronyms or scientific names in the title unless Louisiana State University the common name is not widely known; Student presenter? (Work being reported was completed while a student) Student presenters [email protected] • List all authors, their affiliations, addresses, 225/578-0012 must indicate if they wish their abstract to telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses; Speed Presentation Subcommittee Chair: • Provide a summary of your findings and re- be considered for competition for a best pre- strict your abstract to 200 words. sentation (i.e., paper or poster, but not both) Stuart Welsh All presenters will receive a prompt e-mail con- award. If they respond “no,” the presentation U.S. Geological Survey/West Virginia Cooperative Fish and Widlife Research Unit firmation of their abstract submission and will be will be considered for inclusion in the Annual Meeting by the Program Committee, but will [email protected] notified of acceptance and the designated time 304/293-5006 and place of their presentation by 30 April 2010. not receive further consideration by the Stu- dent Judging Committee. If students indicate Organizing a Continuing Education For contributed papers, you will have the op- “yes,” they will be required to submit an ap- course or workshop: portunity during the abstract submission process plication to the Student Judging Committee. Pat Mazik to indicate which two general topics best fit the Components of the application will include an U.S. Geological Survey/ concept of your abstract. Topics include: Bioengi- extended abstract and a check-off from their West Virginia Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Re- neering, Communities and Ecosystems, Contami- mentor indicating that the study is at a stage search Unit nants and Toxicology, Education, Fish Culture, appropriate for consideration for an award. [email protected] Fish Health, Fish Conservation, Freshwater Fish 304/293-4943

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 461 Continued from page 453. Continued from page 420.

be feasible. Thank you for your consideration. It would be a pleasure to meet other fisheries professionals and The power of science and of scientists dealing with receive such recognition I kind of wonder if I have partici- natural resource issues absolutely amazed me. I’d gone pated in AFS enough to receive such recognition. into battle with very little faith that people would really care about what I did as a scientist or what I had to say. —Ken Semmens But, this tenuous faith was completely turned around as a result of my experience. Childhood dreams of help- ing humankind have good relations with the Earth had actually become reality. My faith in government and in For the record, I have been a member of AFS since academia was strengthened. I also realized, for the first 1964. (In just a few years, I will be a 50-year member.) time in my budding career, the importance of member- Further, the AFS Annual Meeting in Nashville will be my ship networking in a professional scientific organization, 40th (consecutive) AFS Annual Meeting. My first meeting the power of our common bonds and value systems, was the 100th AFS Meeting at the Waldorf Astoria (New and the incredible respect and credibility that the AFS York) in 1970, where I presented a paper on temperature has in the halls of government when issues pertaining preference of white perch. (I think that was the meeting to fisheries and aquatic resources are being addressed I presented that paper. I think I presented papers at every and decisions are being made. To say that my batter- ies were charged would be an understatement. It was meeting until I left Ichthyological Associates for Harza more like being propelled into a brand new world with Engineering in 1984.) I have served as an associate editor afterburners turned on. I became a “can do” profes- of Transactions under Bob Kendall, served on the Board sional fully committed not only to my work as a fisheries of Professional Certification, and was the secretary- scientist, but also to a “can do” professional society, the treasurer of the AFS Water Quality Section from 1977 American Fisheries Society. through 2007. My early career experience reflects and underscores the fundamental purpose of AFS. AFS exists to help —John W. Meldrim fisheries professionals do their job. It is a very human- oriented organization. Our very name, the American Fisheries Society perpetually reminds us that we deal with the interface of people and the resources. These Thanks so much for the honor, I would love to have interfaces are dynamic and fluid. So are our identities, the award. I first joined AFS as a student at San Diego individually and corporately. There are, however, com- State in 1967 or 68 and with one exception I am pretty mon denominators that bring us together and bond us sure I have been a paid-up member since. The only together. We need to revisit them. We need to spend exception I remember was when I forgot to pay my dues some time in discussion and reflection regarding funda- while I was doing a research project on Lake Tanganyika mental elements that brought us into the fisheries pro- in either 1974 or 75. fessions and about those that have sustained us through our pilgrimages…and share them with our colleagues. —Ken Thompson This will strengthen us individually as professionals. It also will help AFS sharpen its focus with respect to how it can serve the needs of its members. To help us accom- plish this, the theme for my year as your president and Thank you for this recognition award; I had forgot- for the 2010 Annual Meeting in Pittsburgh is “Merging ten that it has been so long and I am proud that I have Our Deeper Currents.” It is my intention that this year been a part of this organization. I commend your efforts will be a celebration of synergism for common purpose. to recognize these senior members and suggest that you share these notices with their Chapter’s executive officers Reference: where they might also recognize these members at their local annual meetings. Jackson, D. C., and J. R. Jackson. 1989. A glimmer of hope for stream fisheries in Mississippi. Fisheries 14(3):4-9. —Bob Fujimora

462 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g To submit upcoming events for inclusion on the aFS Web site Calendar, send CALeNDAr: event name, dates, city, state/province, web address, and contact information FISHERIES EVENTS to cworth@fi sheries.org. (If space is available, events will also be printed in Fisheries magazine.)

More events listed at www.fi sheries.org.

Sept 8-10 Fourth International Fisheries Congress Vladivostok, Russia www.fi sh-forum.ru

Sep 16-19 World Fishing Exhibition 2009 Vigo, Spain www.worldfi shingexhibition.com

Sep 21-25 International Council for the Exploration of the Sea annual Science Conference Berlin, Germany www.ices.dk

Sep 25-28 Combined australian Entomological Society’s 40th aGM & Scientifi c Conference / Society of australian Systematic Biologists / 9th Invertebrate Biodiversity and Conservation / australian Coral reef Society Conference Darwin, Australia www.evolutionbiodiversity2009.org

Sep 25-29 World aquaculture 2009 Veracruz, Mexico www.was.org

Sep 28-Oct 2 australian Society for Limnology Congress: Water in a Dry Land: Sustaining arid Zone Rivers and Wetlands Alice Springs, Northern Territory www.asl.org.au

Oct 15-16 2009 Virginia Water Research Conference: Water Resources in Changing Climates Richmond, Virginia www.vwrrc.vt.edu/2009confence.html

Oct 15-16 Using acoustic Tags to Track Fish Seattle, Washington www.htisonar.com/at_short_course.htm

Oct 15-17 CanSEE Eighth Biennial Conference—Ecological Economics: Prosperity for a Sustainable Society Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada www.cansee.org

Oct 19-21 International arctic Fisheries Symposium Anchorage, Alaska www.nprb.org/iafs2009

Oct 20-22 12th Biennial Governor’s Conference on the Managment of the Illinois River System Peoria, Illinois www.conferences.uiuc.edu/ilriver

Oct 22-24 Western Division of the aFS 2nd annual Student Colloquium Fort Collins, Colorado Nate Cathcart: [email protected] or http://welcome.warnercnr.colostate.edu/afs-home/ index.php

Oct 24-25 Using acoustic Tags to Track Fish Lyone, France www.htisonar.com/at_short_course_lyon.htm

Oct 25-30 Sixth International Symposium on Sturgeon Wuhan, Hubei Province, China www.iss6.org

nov 2-4 International Symposium on Integrating Offshore Renewable Energy System and aquaculture Newport, Rhode Island http://seaagrant.gso.uri.edu/baird/2009

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 463 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.

Supervisory Fishery Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Contact: Send letter of intent and resume with Service, Warm Springs National Fish Hatchery, Oregon. contact information phone and e-mail for three Salary: $67,613 - $80,402 per year. references to James Nagler, Department of Biological Closing: 7 September 2009. Sciences, University of Idaho, PO Box 443051, Responsibilities: Serve as the manager of the Warm Moscow, Idaho; 83844-3051 or [email protected]. Springs National Fish Hatchery, which is located near Warm Springs, Oregon, on the Confederated Tribes of Research Technician, Department of Fisheries, the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (CTWSRO). Auburn University. The hatchery currently produces approximately Salary: Stipend $16,000–18,000, plus waiver of both 750,000 spring Chinook salmon, weighing about in-state and out-of-state tuition 40,000 pounds, for on-station releases into the Warm Closing: 1 October 2009. Springs River. The location of the hatchery on the Responsibilities: Conduct research on one of two reservation underscores the importance of cooperation new studies—one will deal with the influence of with the CTWSRO. introduced yellow perch on the aquatic communities Qualifications: See announcement at http:// in two Alabama reservoirs, and the other will deal with jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.aspx?JobID=82726127 fish passage through two lock-and-dam structures on &q=277324&sort=rv,-dtex&vw=b&re=134&FedEm the Alabama River. p=N&FedPub=Y&call=default.aspx&AVSDM=2009- Qualifications: B.S. degree in ecology, fisheries, 08-10+11:18:00&rc=2&TabNum=6, under job biology, or related field with competitive GPA and GRE announcement: R1-09-277324-LF. scores. Research experience is preferred. Contact: The application process that is described Contact: Send a letter of interest, a current CV in the vacancy announcement must be followed. including GPA, and GRE scores, names and contact Applications sent directly to the Warm Springs NFH information for three references, and photocopies/ will NOT receive consideration. See application at scans of transcripts to Russell Wright, wrighr2@ http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.aspx?JobID=82726 auburn.edu, see www.auburn.edu/~devridr/ 127&q=277324&sort=rv,-dtex&vw=b&re=134&FedEm openings/09web-gra-blurb.pdf. p=N&FedPub=Y&call=default.aspx&AVSDM=2009-08- 10+11:18:00&rc=2&TabNum=6. MS Graduate Assistantship, University of Maine. Salary: $17,500 per year, 2.5 year, $1,100 health, Ph.D. Graduate Research Assistantship, University tuition waiver. of Idaho. Closing: Until filled, available 1 January 2009. Salary: $17,000 per year in- and out-of-state tuition Responsibilities: Investigate American shad in the waived and health insurance included Penobscot River in anticipation of main-stem dam Closing: 1 December 2009. removals. Three methodologies will be applied DIDSON Responsibilities: Pursue Ph.D. thesis research on imaging, radio telemetry, and habitat modeling. sex determination in the rainbow trout. Project will Ability to interact professionally with agencies and is involve a molecular biological approach to novel gene essential. Funded by TNC and NOAA—Fisheries for 2.5 discovery including an application of bioinformatics. years. Incumbent will be co-advised and may serve as Design experiments and collect data, learn and employ a teaching assistant one semester. gene knockdown techniques, and present results Qualifications: B.S. in biological science or in manuscripts and at professional meetings. Some equivalent, excellent quantitative skills, interest in laboratory teaching at the undergraduate level is also fisheries science. GPA of 3.0 and GRE of 1100. required for the Ph.D. degree. Contact: Send CV, transcripts copies, 3 references, Qualifications: B.S. or M.S. in molecular biology or a and GRE scores to USGS Maine Cooperative Unit, related field 3.0 GPA and 1200 v q GRE score required. Attn: J. Zydlewski, [email protected]; and Michael

464 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Bailey, 5755 Nutting Hall, University of Maine, Orono, Ph.D. Graduate Research Assistantship, Fisheries Maine 04469, [email protected]. Illinois Aquaculture Center, Southern Illinois University. Post Doctorial Research Associate—Stock Salary: $18,000 per year plus full tuition waiver and Assessment, Fisheries Oceanography Agency, partially subsidized health insurance, Cooperative Institute for Marine Resources Closing: 1 November 2009 or until filled. Studies, Hatfield Marine Science Center, Oregon Responsibilities: Conduct research on otolith State University, Newport, Oregon; and Seattle, microchemistry and stable isotopic compositions as Washington. indicators of environmental history for large river Salary: $45,000–48,000. fishes. Closing: 15 September 2009. Start date: January 2010. Responsibilities: Fixed-term appointment through Qualifications: M.S. in Fisheries or a closely related the Cooperative Institute for Marine Resources field with an interest in large river fish ecology Studies. Work on a multidisciplinary project that and strong quantitative and communication skills. seeks to develop a real-time tool for predicting the Experience with fish sampling in large rivers and/ distribution of fish species using satellite-derived or otolith microchemistry and stable isotope analysis information on ocean conditions and other fisheries desirable but not required. Applicants must meet and environmental parameters. admission requirements for the graduate school and Qualifications: See https://jobs.oregonstate.edu, Department of Zoology at SIUC. See www.science.siu. Search Posting 0004391. edu/zoology. Closing: 15 September 2009 to be fully considered. Contact: Submit a letter of interest, resume, contact Contact: See https://jobs.oregonstate.edu. Contact information for three references, and copies of [email protected]. AA/EOE and has a policy of transcripts and GRE scores to Greg Whitledge, being responsive to needs of dual career couples. Southern Illinois University, Fisheries Illinois

Lotek Wireless

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 465 Aquaculture Center, Carbondale, Illinois 62901-6511 Qualifications: B.S. in fisheries, or related field. 618/453-6089. See http://fisheries.siuc.edu. Familiarity with small boats. Field sampling and lab experience preferred. Ability to work in unusual Technician, Illinois Natural History Survey, Lake weather, nights, or weekends. Ability to swim. Michigan Biological Station, Zion. Contact: Applications should be received by 30 August 2009. Electronic applications required letter Salary: $10 to $12 per hour. of application; resume; copy of unofficial transcripts; Closing: Until filled. and names, addresses and telephone numbers of 3 Responsibilities: Participate in research projects references to [email protected], reference PRF investigating trophic links and recruitment dynamics. 1603 in subject line. If electronic version unavailable, Assist with field sampling, sample processing, data send to HR Illinois Natural History Survey, 1816 S. Oak entry and maintaining field equipment. Street, Champaign, Illinois 61820 or fax 217/333- Start date: 1 October 2009 for 1 year with possible 4949. Direct technical questions to Sergiusz Czesny, extension. 847/872-8677, [email protected].

9 SEPT.

466 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g Advanced Telemetry Systems

Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g 467 Hydroacoustic Technology, Inc.

468 Fisheries • v o l 34 n o 9 • s e p t e m b e r 2009 • w w w .f i s h e r i e s .o r g