Determining Current Status of Sea in the Lower Fox River Executive Summary

Bart De Stasio, Ph.D. Professor of Biology Dennis & Charlot Nelson Singleton Professor of Biological Sciences Lawrence University Appleton, WI 54911

Student Assistants: Jared Padway (’11) Elise Pesch (’11) Vince Butitta (’12)

The Lower Fox River has played an important role historically in the development and life of the Fox Valley communities, and continues to be a key feature of this area related to economic and environmental issues. The Fox River is also a major connection between the and the important inland water resources of the Fox-Wolf Basin. A continuing major concern is the possible upstream spread of like the (Petromyzon marinus) from Green Bay to and beyond. The sea lamprey has caused serious damage to other inland fisheries and local sport fishing economies throughout the Great Lakes. Studies of populations in the Lower Fox River during the early 1990s documented the presence of sea lamprey above the DePere Dam, but more recent studies have not been conducted. With the help of funding from the Mielke Foundation we sampled the Lower Fox River during the spring and summer of 2011 to determine the current status of sea lamprey populations. We placed multiple “barrel traps,” designed specifically for sampling sea lamprey, along the banks of the Lower Fox River, below and above the De Pere lock & dam. Traps were deployed during the months of May (see attached student report) and June (as part of AIS monitoring for the Fox River Navigational System Authority), and were checked daily. While other fish and crayfish species were collected, no sea lamprey individuals were captured. Although the absence of individuals in our traps does not allow us to definitively state that no sea lamprey are in the Lower Fox River, it is a good sign that during the main migration period (May-June) sea lamprey are not abundant enough to be observed with standard trapping procedures. This is important information in light of the recent activities related to opening the locks along the entire Lower Fox River.

Testing Sea Lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) Presence in the Lower Fox River

Vince Butitta, Jared Padway, Elise Pesch

Biology Department, Lawrence University

June 1st, 2011

ABSTRACT

Sea lamprey presence has been confirmed in Green Bay, the mouth of the Fox

River by Cochran and Lyons (2004). Although lamprey have been known to travel through lock systems, the extent of their invasion up the Lower Fox River has not recently been studied. We placed multiple “barrel traps” designed specifically for sea lamprey along the banks of the Lower Fox River, initially placing traps below and above the De Pere lock. Our objective was to determine if sea lamprey are present at critical points in the Lower Fox River. As of May 18th, 2011 sea lamprey presence has not yet been confirmed in the Lower Fox River.

HISTORY/BACKGROUND

Sea lamprey have successfully invaded all five of the Great Lakes. Their presence has caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damages to our fisheries and in cost of management efforts. They have had a catastrophic impact on the ecological health of the Great Lakes, devastating our native fish populations and restructuring the intricate dynamics of the ecosystem (Ricciardi 2001, Cochran and

Marks 1995, US Geological Survey 2008).

The Department of Natural Resources has investigated many techniques to prevent population growth and expansion of sea lamprey invasion. One control technique is lampricide, which physiologically targets and kills lamprey. Lampricide applications are costly, damaging to our native lamprey population and will never completely eliminate sea lamprey from the tributaries of the Great Lakes.

Therefore, in order to prevent the spread of lamprey, one solution is to leave the locks throughout the Fox River closed year-round. Dr. Phil Cochran confirmed the presence of sea lamprey at the mouth of the Lower Fox River and was pivotal in the addition of an invasive species barrier at the Rapid Croche lock (Cochran 1994,

Cochran & Lyons 2004), hoping that lamprey invasion of Lake Winnebago would be prevented. An overhang at the top of the barrier prohibits lamprey from passing over the lock. No evidence has been found that sea lamprey are above the Rapid

Croche lock.

IMPORTANCE OF STUDY

Confirmation of sea lamprey presence in the Lower Fox River would provide quantitative data in support of permanent barriers (such as Rapid Croche invasive species barrier). Confirmation would also provide a better understanding of mobility of lamprey through the lock systems.

OBJECTIVE

Determine the extent of current invasion of sea lamprey by confirmation of presence at critical locations along the Lower Fox River.

METHODS:

Based upon the trap design of Morris and Maitland (1987) we constructed several traps. Each trap had two chambers in order to decrease the odds of lamprey escaping. Entrance funnels pointing into the trap were meant to both facilitate lamprey entrance into the trap and make it difficult for lamprey to swim back out.

The diameter at the tip of the funnel was chosen by estimation of how small of a hole lamprey could swim through based upon average lamprey diameter.

Since lamprey are photosensitive, we covered the outside of the trap with duct tape to create a dark hiding place to attract lamprey. Gaps were left between strips of duct tape in order to allow for sufficient water flow through the trap.

One of the traps we constructed, shown with both chambers open. Traps were placed upstream and downstream of the De Pere lock. Metal stakes (approximately 4 feet) were pounded into the mixed sandy and rocky substrate. Ropes attached to the back end of the trap were secured around the pole.

The mouth of each trap faced downstream, as lamprey swim upstream while spawning. Due to difficulty finding a site to drive in a fourth stake, one trap was secured by attached ropes to the front and back of the trap and tying the ropes to trees along the shoreline. Traps were checked at least every 24 hours.

♦

♦

Figure 1: The locations of our traps at the De Pere lock.

RESULTS

No sea lamprey were caught in this study, therefore we are unable to confirm their presence in the Fox River. Two rusty crayfish and two round gobies were trapped upstream of the De Pere Dam. Two bluegills were trapped downstream of the De Pere Dam.

Trap 1 Trap 2 Trap 3 Trap 4 Trapping Species Species Species Species Date Hours Capture Capture Capture Capture 2 Rusty 4-May 21 Crayfish - - - 9-May 24 1 Round Goby - - - 12-May 24 - - - - 1 Round 13-May 21 - - - Goby 14-May 24 - - - - 15-May 24 - 1 Blue Gill - - 17-May 24 - - - - 18-May 24 - - 1 Blue Gill - Table 1: Table 1 depicts the results of our trappings. Trap 1 and trap 2 were both located upstream of the De Pere lock, while trap 3 and trap 4 were both located downstream of the De Pere lock. Species caught: Rusty Crayfish (Orconectes rusticus), Round Goby (Neogobius melanostomus), Blue Gill (Lepomis macrochirus).

CONCLUSIONS At this stage in our study, we have not caught any sea lamprey either upstream or downstream from the De Pere Dam. This means that one of two possible conclusions can be drawn from our current research. First, it is possible that sea lamprey are no longer using the Fox River for their spawning run. Second, it is possible that our traps were not properly constructed, not attractive enough to lamprey, or were not great enough in number to catch spawning sea lamprey As a result of these possible conclusions, it is likely that sea lamprey are not present in the De Pere area of the Fox River this year. Therefore, we are far from understanding the necessity of invasive species barriers in prohibiting sea lamprey spawning as opposed to the effectiveness of a simple lock system. Also, we have not yet gained any new information about the time of year as well as duration of the sea lamprey spawning run.

With further research we could address the possible issues of ineffective trap placement, improperly-sized trap openings (must search for a correct balance between facilitating lamprey entry and retaining encased lamprey), insufficient trap numbers, improper timing, and the problem of the traps not being attractive to lamprey.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS We have a number of ideas for future sea lamprey sampling in the Fox River.

First, we were only able to attract lamprey with a darker space, the duct taped trap, due to the fact that sea lamprey are photosensitive. Future trapping efforts should employ lamprey pheromones as bait, as sampling in the Fox River would occur during spawning season. Also, if sampling were to begin earlier in the calendar year it would give us a larger window to possibly catch the time table of sea lamprey spawning. Finally, more traps would increase the probability of catching spawning sea lamprey, and as a result we would suggest placing more traps both upstream and downstream of the dams.

In conclusion, sea lamprey presence can have devastating effects on native fish populations, delicate ecosystems, or the economies of rivers they may spawn in. It is essential that continued monitoring of sea lamprey spawning habits take place in an attempt to minimize these possible effects in the tributaries and streams of the

Great Lakes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank the Mielke Family Foundation for funding this research. We would also like to thank our advisor, Bart De Stasio, for direction and insight, as well as Lawrence University for allowing us to use their facilities and vehicles.

WORKS CITED Cochran, P.A. 1994. Occurrence and significance of the sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) in the lower Fox River, Wisconsin. Transactions of the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters. 82:17-21. Cochran PA, Lyons J (2004) Field and laboratory observations on the ecology and behavior of the ( unicuspis) in Wisconsin. Freshwater Ecol 19:245–253. Cochran PA, Marks JE (1995) Biology of the silver lamprey, Ichthyomyzon unicuspis, in Green Bay and the lower Fox River, with a comparison to the sea lamprey, Petromyzon marinus. Copeia 1995:409–421. Morris, K.H. and Maitland, P.S. (1987). A trap for catching adult lampreys (petromyzonidae) in running water. J. Fish Biol., 31, 513-516. Ricciardi, A. (2001) Facilitative interactions among aquatic invaders: is an "invasional meltdown" occurring in the Great Lakes? Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 58(12): 2513–2525.

Additional Sources of Information Beamish RJ (1980) Adult biology of the river lamprey ( ayresi) and the (Lampetrat ridentata) from the Pacific Coast of Canada. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 37:1906–1923 Beamish RJ, Levings CD (1991) Abundance and freshwater migrations of the anadromous parasitic lamprey(Lampetra tridentata), in a tributary of the Fraser River, British Columbia. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 48:1250–1263 Hardisty, M.W. and Potter, I.C. (eds.) (1971). The biology of lampreys. Vol 1. Academic Press, London. Pp 127-206. Harvey J & Cowx I (2003).Monitoring the River, Brook and Sea Lamprey, Lampetra fluviatilis, L. planeri and Petromyzon marinus.Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Monitoring Series No.5,English Nature,Peterborough. Jang M-H, Lucas MC (2005) Reproductive ecology of the river lamprey. J Fish Biol 66:499–512. Kelso JRM, Glova GJ (1993) Distribution, upstream migration and habitat selection of maturing lampreys, australis, in Pigeon Bay Stream, New Zealand. Australian J Mar Freshwater Res 44:749–759 Maitland PS (2003) Ecology of the river, brook, and sea lamprey. In: Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers. Conservation Techniques Series No. 5 English Nature, Peterborough. Available via the Life in UK rivers project, http://www.english-nature.org.uk/lifeinukrivers/ publications/lamprey.pdf Cited 23 March 2006 Moser M.L., Close D.A. (2003) Assessing Pacific lamprey status in the Columbia River Basin. Northwest Sci 77:116–125 Schuldt, R.J. and Heinrich, J.W. (1982). Portable trap for collecting adult sea lampreys. Progve. Fish-Cult., 4, 220-221. United States. US Fish and Wildlife Service. Fact Sheet Pacific Lamprey. By B. Streif. USFWS, 2008. Web. 11 Mar. 2011.