DOCSLIB.ORG

Options for Selectively Controlling Non-Indigenous Fish in the Upper Colorado River Basin

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Options for Selectively Controlling Non-Indigenous Fish in the Upper Colorado River Basin Options for Selectively Controlling Non-Indigenous Fish in the Upper Colorado River Basin Draft Report June 1995 Leo D. Lentsch Native Fish and Herptile Coordinator Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Robert Muth Larval Fish Lab Colorado State University Paul D. Thompson Native Fish Biologist Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Dr. Todd A. Crowl Utah State University and Brian G. Hoskins Native Fish Technician Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Colorado River Fishery Project Salt Lake City, Utah TABLE OP CONTENTS PAGE ABSTRACT .......................... INTRODUCTION ...................... Non-Indigenous Problems ..... Objectives ................... Control Options ............. Mechanical Control ..... Chemical Control ....... Biological Control ..... Physicochemical Control METHODS .......................................................... Literature Review .......................................... Species Accounts ........................................... RESULTS .......................................................... Species Accounts ........................................... Clupeidae-Herrings ................................... Threadfin Shad .................................. Cyprinidae-Carps and Minnows ........................ Red Shiner ...................................... Common Carp ..................................... Utah Chub ........................................ Leathers ide Chub ................................ Brassy Minnow ................................... Plains Minnow ................................... Sand Shiner ..................................... Fathead Minnow .................................. Longnose Dace ................................... Redside Shiner .................................. Creek Chub ...................................... Catostomidae-Suckers ................................. Utah Sucker ..................................... Longnose Sucker ................................. White Sucker .................................... Ictaluridae-Bullhead Catfishes ...................... Black Bullhead .................................. Yellow Bullhead ................................. Channel Catfish ................................. Esocidae-Pikes ....................................... Northern Pike ................................... Cyprinodontidae-Killifishes ......................... Plains Topminnow ................................ Plains Killifish ................................ Poeciliidae-Livebearers .............................. Western Mosquitofish ............................ i PAGE Percichthyidae-Temperate Basses ..................... White Bass ...................................... Striped Bass .................................... Centrarchidae-Sunfishes .............................. Green Sunfish ................................... Bluegill ......................................... Smallmouth Bass ................................. Largemouth Bass ................................. White Crappie ................................... Black Crappie ................................... Percidae-Perches ..................................... Iowa Darter ..................................... Johnny Darter ................................... Yellow Perch .................................... Walleye .......................................... DISCUSSION ....................................................... Clupeidae .................................................. Cyprinidae ................................................. Catostomidae ............................................... Ictaluridae ................................................ Esocidae ................................................... Cyprinodontidae ............................................ Poeciliidae ................................................ Percichthyidae ............................................. Centrarchidae .............................................. Percidae ................................................... RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................. Mechanical Control ........................................ Chemical Control ........................................... Biological Control ........................................ Physicochemical Control ................................... LITERATURE CITED ................................................ 11 LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1. Non-native, non-salmonid fishes in the UCRB ....... Table 2. Status of non-native, non-salmonid fishes in the UCRB (from Tyus et al. 1982) ...................... Table 3. Control options for non-native, non-salmonid fishes in the UCRB ......................... iii ABSTRACT The introduction of non-indigenous fish in the Upper Colorado River Basin (UCRB) has been contributed to the decline of the native fish fauna. There is a need to control the interactions between native and nonnative species throughout the upper basin to insure the preservation and possible recovery of the endangered fishes. We referenced >10,000 journal articles, unpublished reports, regional fisheries guides, and general fishery biology textbooks to obtain pertinent information about the life history and control options for the nonnative fish in the UCRB. The nonnative fish families of concern in the UCRB are: cyprinidae, catostomidae, ictaluridae, esocidae, centrarchidae, and percidae. Physicochemical approaches are the most promising control option for most nonnative cyprinids. Correlative evidence has demonstrated that relative abundance of red shiner, sand shiner, fathead minnow, and redside shiner is negatively affected by high river discharges and associated lower water temperatures. Selective control of carp and white sucker, however, will probably require the combination of the physiochemical approach and mechanical or chemical control. These cyprinids are generally tolerant to a wide range of environmental conditions. The most promising method to selectively control channel catfish and black bullhead is mechanical removal. Further expansion of northern pike can be prevented with increased fishing pressure, the installation of barriers to prevent downstream movement from reservoirs, and netting and/or electrofishing areas of high concentration. Control measures directed towards centrarchids should begin by preventing the downstream movement from impoundments. Eliminating stocking in and isolating off-channel habitats from river channels would reduce their abundance. Targeting spawning aggregations for netting, electrofishing, and/or chemical treatment also are viable mechanical control options for centrarchids. Further walleye expansion in the upper basin can be prevented by eliminating reservoir stockings and installing fish barriers to prevent downstream movement from reservoirs. INTRODUCTION The introduction of non-indigenous fish in the Upper Colorado River Basin (UCRB) began over 100 years ago. The first introductions were made primarily for the purpose of increasing the food supply (Popov and Low 1950) and for sport. These introductions were made primarily because European settlers saw little tangible value in the native fish assemblage (Hawkins and Nesler 1991). Since 1900, most introductions have been made in the interest of anglers (Popov and Low 1950). Introduced species included members of the centrarchid, percid, ictalurid, cyprinid (carp), and salmonid families (Behnke and Benson 1983). Consequently, game fish species and bait fish have become established and in some cases expanded their range in the upper basin. The ichthyofauna of the UCRB is now dominated by non- indigenous species. In 1982, Tyus et al. reported that 42 of the 55 fish species (76%) in the upper basin have been introduced. Thirty-four of these 42 introduced species are non-salmonid (Table 1). These introduced species account for over 90% of the fish sampled during standardized efforts in the basin (McAda et. al. 1994). Behnke and Benson (1983) attributed the dominance of non-indigenous fish species in the basin to dramatic alterations in flow regimes, water quality, temperature, and habitat characteristics. They noted that water development had converted a turbulent, highly variable river system into a relatively 1 2 stable system with flows and temperature patterns that allowed the indiscriminate introductions of non-indigenous fish to flourish. Hawkins and Resler (1991) identified six species on a list of 28 non-native species, which were considered by CRB researchers to be of greatest or widespread concern and adversely impact native fishes of the CRB and the southwestern United States. These species are channel catfish, red shiner, northern pike, common carp, green sunfish, and fathead minnow. Other species of increasing concern are sand shiner, white sucker, black bullhead, and largemouth bass. The four cyprinids and channel catfish are considered to be either abundant or common in the upper basin (Table 2) and sympatric with native fishes. The remaining species, although not as common, are primarily considered threats to native fishes due to their increasing abundance, habitat preference, and/or piscivorous nature. Selective Control Options By the 1930's, strategies for the manipulation (e.g. control) of fish populations had been developed to improve sport fishing (Wiley and Wydoski 1993). Since the 1930's, additional techniques have been developed to manipulate/control fish communities. Three control options have generally been recognized to reduce undesirable
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Seasonal and Diel Movements and Habitat Use of Robust Redhorses in the Lower Savannah River. Georgia, and South Carolina
    Transactions of the American FisheriesSociety 135:1145-1155, 2006 [Article] © Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2006 DO: 10.1577/705-230.1 Seasonal and Diel Movements and Habitat Use of Robust Redhorses in the Lower Savannah River, Georgia and South Carolina TIMOTHY B. GRABOWSKI*I Department of Biological Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina,29634-0326, USA J. JEFFERY ISELY U.S. Geological Survey, South Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, 29634-0372, USA Abstract.-The robust redhorse Moxostonta robustum is a large riverine catostomid whose distribution is restricted to three Atlantic Slope drainages. Once presumed extinct, this species was rediscovered in 1991. Despite being the focus of conservation and recovery efforts, the robust redhorse's movements and habitat use are virtually unknown. We surgically implanted pulse-coded radio transmitters into 17 wild adults (460-690 mm total length) below the downstream-most dam on the Savannah River and into 2 fish above this dam. Individuals were located every 2 weeks from June 2002 to September 2003 and monthly thereafter to May 2005. Additionally, we located 5-10 individuals every 2 h over a 48-h period during each season. Study fish moved at least 24.7 ± 8.4 river kilometers (rkm; mean ± SE) per season. This movement was generally downstream except during spring. Some individuals moved downstream by as much as 195 rkm from their release sites. Seasonal migrations were correlated to seasonal changes in water temperature. Robust redhorses initiated spring upstream migrations when water temperature reached approximately 12'C. Our diel tracking suggests that robust redhorses occupy small reaches of river (- 1.0 rkm) and are mainly active diumally.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Larvae, Development, Allometric Growth, and the Aquatic Environment
    II. Developmental and environmental interactions ICES mar. Sei. Symp., 201: 21-34. 1995 Fish larvae, development, allometric growth, and the aquatic environment J. W. M. Osse and J. G. M. van den Boogaart Osse, J. W. M., and van den Boogaart, J. G. M. 1995. Fish larvae, development, allometric growth, and the aquatic environment. - ICES mar. Sei. Symp., 201: 21-34. During metamorphosis, fish larvae undergo rapid changes in external appearance and dimensions of body parts. The juveniles closely resemble the adult form. The focus of the present paper is the comparison of stages of development of fishes belonging within different taxa in a search for general patterns. The hypothesis that these patterns reflect the priorities of vital functions, e.g., feeding, locomotion, and respiration, is tested taking into account the size-dependent influences of the aquatic environment on the larvae. A review of some literature on ailometries of fish larvae is given and related to the rapidly changing balance between inertial and viscous forces in relation to body length and swimming velocity. New data on the swimming of larval and juvenile carp are presented. It is concluded that the patterns of development and growth shows in many cases a close parallel with the successive functional requirements. J. W. M. Osse and J. G. M. van den Boogaart: Wageningen Agricultural University, Department of Experimental Animal Morphology and Cell Biology, Marijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The Netherlands [tel: (+31) (0)317 483509, fax: (+31) (0)317 483962], Introduction Fish larvae, being so small, must have problems using their limited resources for maintenance, activity, obtain­ Fish larvae are the smallest free-living vertebrates.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Silvery Minnow Hybognathus Argyritis
    COSEWIC Assessment and Update Status Report on the Western Silvery Minnow Hybognathus argyritis in Canada ENDANGERED 2008 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2008. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the western silvery minnow Hybognathus argyritis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 38 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Previous report: COSEWIC. 2001. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the western silvery minnow Hybognathus argyritis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vii + 14 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm) Houston, J.J.P. 1997. COSEWIC status report on the western silvery minnow Hybognathus argyritis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 14 pp. Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge M.K. Lowdon, D.A. Watkinson, and W.G. Franzin for writing the update status report on the western silvery minnow, Hybognathus argyritis in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada, overseen and edited by R. Campbell and C. Renaud, COSEWIC Freshwater Fishes Specialist Subcommittee Co-Chairs. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-953-3215 Fax: 819-994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur le méné d’argent de l’Ouest (Hybognathus argyritis) au Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Esox Lucius) Ecological Risk Screening Summary
    Northern Pike (Esox lucius) Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, February 2019 Web Version, 8/26/2019 Photo: Ryan Hagerty/USFWS. Public Domain – Government Work. Available: https://digitalmedia.fws.gov/digital/collection/natdiglib/id/26990/rec/22. (February 1, 2019). 1 Native Range and Status in the United States Native Range From Froese and Pauly (2019a): “Circumpolar in fresh water. North America: Atlantic, Arctic, Pacific, Great Lakes, and Mississippi River basins from Labrador to Alaska and south to Pennsylvania and Nebraska, USA [Page and Burr 2011]. Eurasia: Caspian, Black, Baltic, White, Barents, Arctic, North and Aral Seas and Atlantic basins, southwest to Adour drainage; Mediterranean basin in Rhône drainage and northern Italy. Widely distributed in central Asia and Siberia easward [sic] to Anadyr drainage (Bering Sea basin). Historically absent from Iberian Peninsula, Mediterranean France, central Italy, southern and western Greece, eastern Adriatic basin, Iceland, western Norway and northern Scotland.” Froese and Pauly (2019a) list Esox lucius as native in Armenia, Azerbaijan, China, Georgia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Moldova, Monaco, 1 Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Ukraine, Canada, and the United States (including Alaska). From Froese and Pauly (2019a): “Occurs in Erqishi river and Ulungur lake [in China].” “Known from the Selenge drainage [in Mongolia] [Kottelat 2006].” “[In Turkey:] Known from the European Black Sea watersheds, Anatolian Black Sea watersheds, Central and Western Anatolian lake watersheds, and Gulf watersheds (Firat Nehri, Dicle Nehri).
    [Show full text]
  • Kansas Stream Fishes
    A POCKET GUIDE TO Kansas Stream Fishes ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ By Jessica Mounts Illustrations © Joseph Tomelleri Sponsored by Chickadee Checkoff, Westar Energy Green Team, Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism, Kansas Alliance for Wetlands & Streams, and Kansas Chapter of the American Fisheries Society Published by the Friends of the Great Plains Nature Center Table of Contents • Introduction • 2 • Fish Anatomy • 3 • Species Accounts: Sturgeons (Family Acipenseridae) • 4 ■ Shovelnose Sturgeon • 5 ■ Pallid Sturgeon • 6 Minnows (Family Cyprinidae) • 7 ■ Southern Redbelly Dace • 8 ■ Western Blacknose Dace • 9 ©Ryan Waters ■ Bluntface Shiner • 10 ■ Red Shiner • 10 ■ Spotfin Shiner • 11 ■ Central Stoneroller • 12 ■ Creek Chub • 12 ■ Peppered Chub / Shoal Chub • 13 Plains Minnow ■ Silver Chub • 14 ■ Hornyhead Chub / Redspot Chub • 15 ■ Gravel Chub • 16 ■ Brassy Minnow • 17 ■ Plains Minnow / Western Silvery Minnow • 18 ■ Cardinal Shiner • 19 ■ Common Shiner • 20 ■ Bigmouth Shiner • 21 ■ • 21 Redfin Shiner Cover Photo: Photo by Ryan ■ Carmine Shiner • 22 Waters. KDWPT Stream ■ Golden Shiner • 22 Survey and Assessment ■ Program collected these Topeka Shiner • 23 male Orangespotted Sunfish ■ Bluntnose Minnow • 24 from Buckner Creek in Hodgeman County, Kansas. ■ Bigeye Shiner • 25 The fish were catalogued ■ Emerald Shiner • 26 and returned to the stream ■ Sand Shiner • 26 after the photograph. ■ Bullhead Minnow • 27 ■ Fathead Minnow • 27 ■ Slim Minnow • 28 ■ Suckermouth Minnow • 28 Suckers (Family Catostomidae) • 29 ■ River Carpsucker •
    [Show full text]
  • Summary Report of Freshwater Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S
    Summary Report of Freshwater Nonindigenous Aquatic Species in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 4—An Update April 2013 Prepared by: Pam L. Fuller, Amy J. Benson, and Matthew J. Cannister U.S. Geological Survey Southeast Ecological Science Center Gainesville, Florida Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Atlanta, Georgia Cover Photos: Silver Carp, Hypophthalmichthys molitrix – Auburn University Giant Applesnail, Pomacea maculata – David Knott Straightedge Crayfish, Procambarus hayi – U.S. Forest Service i Table of Contents Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................................... ii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ v List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................ vi INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Overview of Region 4 Introductions Since 2000 ....................................................................................... 1 Format of Species Accounts ...................................................................................................................... 2 Explanation of Maps ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Habitat Selection of Robust Redhorse Moxostoma Robustum
    HABITAT SELECTION OF ROBUST REDHORSE MOXOSTOMA ROBUSTUM : IMPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPING SAMPLING PROTOCOLS by DIARRA LEMUEL MOSLEY (Under the Direction of Cecil A. Jennings) ABSTRACT Robust Redhorse, described originally in 1870, went unnoticed until 1991 when they were rediscovered in the lower Oconee River, Georgia. This research evaluated one hypothesis (habitat use) for explaining the absence of juveniles (30 mm – 410 mm TL) from samples of wild-caught robust redhorse. Two mesocosms were used to determine if juvenile robust redhorse use available habitats proportionately. Pond-reared juveniles were exposed to four, flow-based habitats (eddies = - 0.12 to -0.01 m/s, slow flow = 0.00 to 0.15 m/s, moderate flow = 0.16 to 0.32 m/s, and backwaters). Location data were recorded for each fish, and overall habitat use was evaluated with a Log-Linear Model. In winter, the fish preferred eddies and backwaters. In early spring the fish preferred eddies. Catch of wild juveniles may be improved by sampling eddies and their associated transitional areas. INDEX WORDS: backwaters, catostomid, eddies, habitat selection, juvenile fish, mesocosm, Moxostoma robustum, Oconee River, robust redhorse HABITAT SELECTION OF ROBUST REDHORSE MOXOSTOMA ROBUSTUM : IMPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPING SAMPLING PROTOCOLS by DIARRA LEMUEL MOSLEY BSFR, University of Georgia, 1998 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF SCIENCE ATHENS, GEORGIA 2006 © 2006 Diarra Lemuel Mosley All Rights Reserved HABITAT SELECTION OF ROBUST REDHORSE MOXOSTOMA ROBUSTUM : IMPLICATIONS FOR DEVELOPING SAMPLING PROTOCOLS by DIARRA LEMUEL MOSLEY Major Professor: Cecil A.
    [Show full text]
  • Water–Quality Assessment of the Eastern Iowa Basins—Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Suspended Sediment, and Organic Carbon in Surface
    Water–Quality Assessment of the Eastern Iowa Basins—Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Suspended Sediment, and Organic Carbon In Surface Water, 1996–98 NATIONAL WATER–QUALITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM Water-Resources Investigations Report 01–4175 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Technical Assistance James Giglierano, Iowa Geological Survey Bureau Robert Libra, Iowa Geological Survey Bureau Clint Beckert, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Dana Kolpin, U.S. Geological Survey Craig Harvey, U.S. Geological Survey Data Collection, Site Construction, Data Entry or Verification Jim Cerveny, U.S. Geological Survey Eric Sadorf, U.S. Geological Survey Debra Sneck-Fahrer, U.S. Geological Survey Matt Bobier, U.S. Geological Survey Jennifer Tobias, U.S. Geological Survey Joel Galloway, U.S. Geological Survey Jon Nania, U.S. Geological Survey Jim Klaus, U.S. Geological Survey Denise Montgomery, U.S. Geological Survey Jake Freier, U.S. Geological Survey Erik Smith, U.S. Geological Survey Bob Einhellig, U.S. Geological Survey Jeff Harms, U.S. Geological Survey Dave Conell, U.S. Geological Survey Joe Gorman, U.S. Geological Survey Al Conkling, U.S. Geological Survey Jim Sondag, U.S. Geological Survey Pat Lustgraaf, U.S. Geological Survey Mike Turco, U.S. Geological Survey Pat Sweeney, U.S. Geological Survey Daron Tanko, U.S. Geological Survey Editorial Review Lanna Combs, U.S. Geological Survey Technical Review Mary Skopec, Iowa Geological Survey Bureau Greg Nalley, U.S. Geological Survey Russell Dash, U.S. Geological Survey Patrick Edelmann, U.S. Geological Survey Robert Buchmiller, U.S. Geological Survey John O. Helgesen, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Quality Assessment of the Eastern Iowa Basins—Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Suspended Sediment, and Organic Carbon in Surface Water, 1996–98 By Kent D.
    [Show full text]
  • Threats, Conservation Strategies, and Prognosis for Suckers (Catostomidae) in North America: Insights from Regional Case Studies of a Diverse Family of Non-Game fishes
    BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION Biological Conservation 121 (2005) 317–331 www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon Review Threats, conservation strategies, and prognosis for suckers (Catostomidae) in North America: insights from regional case studies of a diverse family of non-game fishes Steven J. Cooke a,b,*,1, Christopher M. Bunt c, Steven J. Hamilton d, Cecil A. Jennings e, Michael P. Pearson f, Michael S. Cooperman g, Douglas F. Markle g a Department of Forest Sciences, Centre for Applied Conservation Research, University of British Columbia, 2424 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4 b Centre for Aquatic Ecology, Illinois Natural History Survey, 607 E. Peabody Dr., Champaign, IL 61820, USA c Biotactic Inc., 691 Hidden Valley Rd., Kitchener, Ont., Canada N2C 2S4 d Yankton Field Research Station, Columbia Environmental Research Center, United States Geological Survey, Yankton, SD 57078, USA e United States Geological Survey, Georgia Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, School of Forest Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA f Fisheries Centre and Institute for Resources, Environment, and Sustainability, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z4 g Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA Received 10 December 2003; received in revised form 6 May 2004; accepted 18 May 2004 Abstract Catostomid fishes are a diverse family of 76+ freshwater species that are distributed across North America in many different habitats. This group of fish is facing a variety of impacts and conservation issues that are somewhat unique relative to more economically valuable and heavily managed fish species. Here, we present a brief series of case studies to highlight the threats such as migration barriers, flow regulation, environmental contamination, habitat degradation, exploitation and impacts from introduced (non-native) species that are facing catostomids in different regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Distribution in Skunk River Drainage Above Ames
    Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science Volume 74 Annual Issue Article 20 1967 Fish Distribution in Skunk River Drainage above Ames Larry V. Zach Iowa State University Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy Copyright ©1967 Iowa Academy of Science, Inc. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uni.edu/pias Recommended Citation Zach, Larry V. (1967) "Fish Distribution in Skunk River Drainage above Ames," Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science, 74(1), 105-116. Available at: https://scholarworks.uni.edu/pias/vol74/iss1/20 This Research is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa Academy of Science at UNI ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science by an authorized editor of UNI ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Zach: Fish Distribution in Skunk River Drainage above Ames Fish Distribution in Skunk River Drainage above Ames 1 LARRY v. ZACH 2 Abstract. From June 10 to November 17, 1966, 31 spe­ cies of fish were recorded from the Skunk River above Ames. Length frequencies indicate the seasonal growth of Notropis cornutus, N. lutrensis, Pimephales notatus, and P. promelas. Species associated with headwater, riffle, pool and main chan­ nel are listed. A flood-control darn has been proposed for the Skunk River north of Ames. Since such construction would result in changes in the fish distribution and species composition, the present dis­ tribution of fish is of particular interest. The study area consisted of the Skunk River drainage sjrstern, Hamilton and Story Counties, from the headwaters to' Ames, about 35 miles downstream (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Subject to Overflow: the History of Drainage Districts in Jasper County, Iowa
    SUBJECT TO OVERFLOW: THE HISTORY OF DRAINAGE DISTRICTS IN JASPER COUNTY, lOWA A Thesis by JOSEPH W. OTTO Submitted to the Graduate School · Appalachian State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS August 2012 Department of History SUBJECT TO OVERFLOW: THE HISTORY OF DRAINAGE DISTRICTS IN JASPER COUNTY, IOWA A Thesis by JOSEPH W. OTTO August 2012 APPROVED BY: Dr. Neva J. Specht Chairperson, Thesis Committee Dr. Lynne M. Getz Member, Thesis Committee Dr. Jeffrey D. Colby Member, Thesis Committee Dr. Lucinda M. McCray Chairperson, Department of History Dr. Edelma D. Huntley ... Dean, Research and Graduate Studies Copyright by Joseph W. Otto 2012 All Rights Reserved .... ABSTRACT SUBJECT TO OVERFLOW: THE HISTORY OF DRAINAGE DISTRICTS IN JASPER COUNTY, lOWA Joseph W. Otto, B.S., Iowa State University M.A., East Carolina University M.A., Appalachian State University Chairperson: Dr. Neva J. Specht This project looks at the environmental changes wrought upon the South Skunk River in Jasper County, Iowa through stream channelization, or artificial straightening of a natural watercourse. Between 1912 and 1915 the Skunk River in Jasper County was straightened so that excess water in the lowlands could drain away more efficiently, making the river's perpetually wet and flood-prone riverbottom lands much more inclined to produce large yields of grain. Draining lowlands was accomplished through the local organization of a drainage district, which gave landowners a legal way to pursue large scale drainage projects. Technologically, a steam powered dredge boat physically altered the river's riparian environment. Large-scale drainage projects like the straightening ofthe ..
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Dissolved Organic Carbon on Pathways of Energy Flow, Resource Availability, and Consumer Biomass in Nutrient-Poor Boreal Lakes
    The effects of dissolved organic carbon on pathways of energy flow, resource availability, and consumer biomass in nutrient-poor boreal lakes By Joseph Tonin A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Manitoba In partial fulfillment of the requirement of the degree of Master of Science Department of Entomology University of Manitoba Winnipeg, Manitoba Copyright © 2019 by Joseph Tonin i Abstract Over the past few decades, terrestrially derived dissolved organic carbon (DOC) has been recognized as a fundamental driver of food web productivity in nutrient poor lakes. The mechanisms that underlie these effects remain poorly understood, particularly for higher trophic levels including zooplankton, benthic invertebrates, and fish. In a survey of eight lakes in northwestern Ontario, I determined consumer biomass and used stable isotopes of carbon, nitrogen, and hydrogen to investigate relationships between DOC and pathways of energy flow, resource and habitat availability, and consumer biomass. Using Bayesian stable isotope mixing models, I found that hypolimnetic phytoplankton were an important resource for zooplankton in low-DOC lakes. With increased DOC concentrations, light attenuation increased and chlorophyll a concentrations below the thermocline were reduced relative to epilimnetic concentrations. At higher DOC concentrations, zooplankton acquired proportionately more energy from low quality terrestrial sources. Zooplankton biomass also declined with increasing utilization of terrestrial sources (allochthony), suggesting that terrestrial organic matter suppresses zooplankton productivity through simultaneous limitations on habitat and resource availability and quality. Based on biomass, the dominant fish species across my study lakes was White Sucker (Catostomus commersonnii). Bayesian mixing models indicated that allochthony by White Suckers increased with DOC and that greater allochthony was related to lower White Sucker biomass measured as catch-per-unit-effort (bCPUE).
    [Show full text]