Ai Tshort

Asian Institute of TechnologyAsian Institute of Technology SERDSERD SeminarSeminar

Jed BrownJed Brown

Fisheries and Wildlife DivisionFisheries and Wildlife Division

District Department of the EnvironmentDistrict Department of the Environment

Washington, DCWashington, DC

USAUSA

OutlineOutline Biography/BackgroundBiography/Background Coastal/anadromous fishCoastal/anadromous fish

SpeciesSpecies Status and problemsStatus and problems

Navigation—vessel strike mortality in Atlantic sturgeonNavigation—vessel strike mortality in Atlantic sturgeon Coastal fish habitat degradation from invasive speciesCoastal fish habitat degradation from invasive species

Common reed phragmites (wetland plant)Common reed phragmites (wetland plant) Dams—fish passage and trade-offs with hydropowerDams—fish passage and trade-offs with hydropower

University of ArizonaUniversity of Arizona

Tested the feasibility of using halophytes (salt-Tested the feasibility of using halophytes (salt-tolerant plants) to remove nutrients (nitrogen and tolerant plants) to remove nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) from saline aquaculture effluentphosphorus) from saline aquaculture effluent

Halophytes being domesticated for production of Halophytes being domesticated for production of oil seed, forageoil seed, forage

Conducted mass balance experiments using Conducted mass balance experiments using draining lysimeters (soil-filled containers)draining lysimeters (soil-filled containers)

University of Arizona--University of Arizona--ResultsResults

Plant-soil system effective in removing N and P from Plant-soil system effective in removing N and P from wastewater over a range of salinitieswastewater over a range of salinities Plants more effective at removing NPlants more effective at removing N Some P leachingSome P leaching

Significant differences among plant species in filtering Significant differences among plant species in filtering capacitycapacity

Large land area required to treat a given area of Large land area required to treat a given area of aquaculture production, but cost is much lower aquaculture production, but cost is much lower relative to aquatic biofiltersrelative to aquatic biofilters

NOAA Fisheries Restoration CenterNOAA Fisheries Restoration Center

Coastal Habitat Restoration ActivitiesCoastal Habitat Restoration Activities

Natural Resource Damage Assessment Program (NRDA)Natural Resource Damage Assessment Program (NRDA)Restoration conducted pursuant to:Restoration conducted pursuant to:

Releases of hazardous materials (CERCLA)Releases of hazardous materials (CERCLA) Oil Spills (OPA)Oil Spills (OPA)

Community-Based RestorationCommunity-Based Restoration

Small Scale Restoration projectsSmall Scale Restoration projects PartnershipsPartnerships Strong involvement from the local communityStrong involvement from the local community

Coastal Wetland Planning, Protection and Restoration ActCoastal Wetland Planning, Protection and Restoration Act

Large-scale coastal wetland restoration in LouisianaLarge-scale coastal wetland restoration in Louisiana

US Fish & Wildlife ServiceUS Fish & Wildlife Service

USFWS—work with states to restore coastal USFWS—work with states to restore coastal and anadromous fisheriesand anadromous fisheries

Delaware RiverDelaware River Central New EnglandCentral New England

Restoring Coastal and Restoring Coastal and Anadromous Fishes and Their Anadromous Fishes and Their Habitat on the US Atlantic Habitat on the US Atlantic Coast: Challenges and Coast: Challenges and OpportunitiesOpportunities

Jed BrownJed BrownFisheries and Wildlife DivisionFisheries and Wildlife DivisionDistrict Department of the EnvironmentDistrict Department of the EnvironmentWashington, DCWashington, DC

OutlineOutline Biography/BackgroundBiography/Background Coastal/anadromous fishCoastal/anadromous fish



Salt marsh plants—common reed phragmitesSalt marsh plants—common reed phragmites Dams—fish passage and trade-offs with hydropowerDams—fish passage and trade-offs with hydropower

USFWS: Focus on estuarine, , coastal and anadromous fish restoration

Anadromous fish--species that migrate into the ocean, mature, and species that migrate into the ocean, mature, and return to rivers to spawnreturn to rivers to spawn

River herring

Atlantic sturgeon

American shad

Sea lamprey

Striped bass

Atlantic salmon

Importance of anadromous fishImportance of anadromous fish

Link between marine and freshwater Link between marine and freshwater systems (e.g. nutrient transfer)systems (e.g. nutrient transfer)

Important commercial and recreational Important commercial and recreational speciesspecies

Prey source for Prey source for marine/estuarine/freshwater fishesmarine/estuarine/freshwater fishes

Historical/cultural resourceHistorical/cultural resource

Work to restore depleted Work to restore depleted populationspopulations

Atlantic salmon—ESA listedAtlantic salmon—ESA listed Shortnose sturgeon—ESA listedShortnose sturgeon—ESA listed Atlantic sturgeon—ESA candidateAtlantic sturgeon—ESA candidate American shad—Most populations American shad—Most populations

decliningdeclining Alewife—Species of ConcernAlewife—Species of Concern Blueback herring—Species of ConcernBlueback herring—Species of Concern

(Secor and Waldman, AFS Symposium 23:203-216,1999)

Atlantic sturgeon landings, Delaware Bay

Delaware River and Estuary American shad harvest

Sutton et al., 1996

1908 U.S. Shad landings ranked 2nd in volume behind Atlantic cod, and 3rd in value behind Pacific salmon and cod.

1960 U.S. shad landings fell to 34th in value and 48th in volume.

They are insignificant today

Drying shad netsNew Castle, DEc. 1900

Problems

Habitat alterationDams

Pollution Over-harvest

Invasive speciesBycatchBycatch

Restoration & ResearchRestoration & Research

Fishery managementFishery management Habitat improvementsHabitat improvements Hatchery productionHatchery production Conduct research Conduct research

Causes of population declinesCauses of population declines Emerging threatsEmerging threats

OutlineOutline Coastal/anadromous fishCoastal/anadromous fish


Navigation—vessel strike mortality in Atlantic sturgeonNavigation—vessel strike mortality in Atlantic sturgeon Disease—striped bass mycobacteriosisDisease—striped bass mycobacteriosis Coastal fish habitat degradation from invasive speciesCoastal fish habitat degradation from invasive species


Atlantic Sturgeon Vessel-Strike Atlantic Sturgeon Vessel-Strike Mortalities in the Delaware Estuary: Mortalities in the Delaware Estuary:

Obstacle to recovery?Obstacle to recovery?

Atlantic SturgeonAtlantic Sturgeon 3.5 meters3.5 meters 350 kilos350 kilos 50-75 years old50-75 years old Live in the ocean, return to rivers to spawnLive in the ocean, return to rivers to spawn Threatened due to overfishing, bycatch, habitat lossThreatened due to overfishing, bycatch, habitat loss

40-year coast-wide harvest moratorium imposed in 1998

Under consideration for listing as a federal Endangered Species

Delaware Estuary Delaware Estuary

Tidal portion of the Delaware RiverStretches fromTrenton, NJ to the Mouth of the Delaware Bay

Highly industrialized

Historicallysupported largestAtlantic sturgeonpopulation

Delaware River, largest Delaware River, largest un-dammed river un-dammed river east of the Mississippieast of the Mississippi

•Delaware Bay--largest Atlantic sturgeon fishery

•Comprised 75% of U.S. harvests 1890-1899

•About 1000 fishermen engaged in this fishery in 1897

•The Delaware Bay may have supported an order of magnitude greater Atlantic sturgeon population than the other Atlantic coast estuaries

Bayside (Caviar), NJ

The caviar gold rush

Vessel-Strike MortalityVessel-Strike Mortality

Mortality caused by entrainment through Mortality caused by entrainment through the propellers of vessels and/or direct the propellers of vessels and/or direct collisions with vessel hulls collisions with vessel hulls

Why are we concerned about Why are we concerned about ship strikes?ship strikes?

Very low population sizesVery low population sizes Largest population in Hudson River ~900 Largest population in Hudson River ~900

spawning adultsspawning adults Altamaha River~350 spawning adultsAltamaha River~350 spawning adults Delaware unknownDelaware unknown

Long-lived fishLong-lived fish Slow to reach maturitySlow to reach maturity Highly vulnerable to impacts from human Highly vulnerable to impacts from human

activitiesactivities

Delaware River PortDelaware River PortComplexComplex

Largest freshwater port Largest freshwater port

complex in the worldcomplex in the world ~3000 ships transit every year~3000 ships transit every year Ports distant from Bay mouthPorts distant from Bay mouth Ships transit 165 km from Ships transit 165 km from

ocean to reach Philadelphiaocean to reach Philadelphia

Philadelphia/Delaware River PortsPhiladelphia/Delaware River Ports DEDE

Delaware CityDelaware City ClaymontClaymont Reedy PointReedy Point WilmingtonWilmington

NJNJ BurlingtonBurlington CamdenCamden DelairDelair GloucesterGloucester PaulsboroPaulsboro SalemSalem WestvilleWestville

PAPA ChesterChester EddystoneEddystone Fairless HillsFairless Hills Marcus HookMarcus Hook PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia TullytownTullytown

Total Vessel Calls 2007

Ocean-going vessels greater than 10,000 deadweight (DWT)

Houston 6,195

LA/LB 5,492

New York 4,968

New Orleans 4,884

San Francisco 3,945

Philadelphia 3,148

Virginia Ports 2,775

Savannah 2,615

Col. River 2,578

Charleston 2,160

Top 10 38,760

All Ports 63,804

Delaware River Ship ChannelDelaware River Ship Channel Shipping channelShipping channel

•203 km from the mouth of 203 km from the mouth of Delaware Bay to Bordentown, Delaware Bay to Bordentown, NJ (~24 km upstream of of NJ (~24 km upstream of of Philadelphia) Philadelphia)

•Maintained at a depth of 12.2 mMaintained at a depth of 12.2 m

•Width varies from 122 m to Width varies from 122 m to 305m--channel is wider in the 305m--channel is wider in the lower estuary and narrower lower estuary and narrower upstream.upstream.

MonitoringMonitoring Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife (DEDFW) began Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife (DEDFW) began

tracking sturgeon mortalities in 2005. tracking sturgeon mortalities in 2005.

Carcasses were reported by citizens or directly by Carcasses were reported by citizens or directly by agency biologistsagency biologists

No dedicated survey program by DEDFW No dedicated survey program by DEDFW

All sturgeon were measured for total length (or length of All sturgeon were measured for total length (or length of portion found), scanned for tags, sexed when practical, portion found), scanned for tags, sexed when practical, examined for injuries, photo documentedexamined for injuries, photo documented

Vessel strike mortalities 2005-2008Vessel strike mortalities 2005-200828 Atlantic sturgeon carcasses between 2005 and 2008

Ranged from Chester, PA to Cape Henlopen, DE

61% of the sturgeon were of adult size (exceeding or likely to exceed 150 cm total length if not severed)

75% of mortalities reported during the months of May and June

Sturgeon had injuries consistent with being struck by a vessel

Probably only some fraction of the total Probably only some fraction of the total vessel-strike mortalities that have vessel-strike mortalities that have occurred are reportedoccurred are reported

Very few beaches or access areas along the Very few beaches or access areas along the length of the Delaware Bay length of the Delaware Bay

Much of the shoreline has dense marsh limiting Much of the shoreline has dense marsh limiting public access and reducing the likelihood that a public access and reducing the likelihood that a carcass will be foundcarcass will be found

Additionally the data are derived primarily from Additionally the data are derived primarily from reports received by DEDFW, and not from any reports received by DEDFW, and not from any agencies on the New Jersey side of the Estuary. agencies on the New Jersey side of the Estuary.

Egg per Recruit ModelEgg per Recruit Model

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Annual percentage of female sturgeon killed by vessel-strikes

% M

ax

imu

m E

PR

VS VS 50%50% ~2.5% of the female population killed annually ~2.5% of the female population killed annually

If the total population is 1,000 females, then probably not more than 25 If the total population is 1,000 females, then probably not more than 25

females could be killed annually without negatively impacting the populationfemales could be killed annually without negatively impacting the population

Vessel-strike mortality Vessel-strike mortality rates that reduced rates that reduced maximum egg maximum egg production by more than production by more than 50% (50% (VS VS 50%) were 50%) were considered to be considered to be unsustainableunsustainable

Avoiding Adverse ImpactsAvoiding Adverse Impacts

•2006, 9 mortalities in the Delaware Estuary

•If this = 100% of mortalities in the Estuary (and were all female), then the population would need to exceed 360 female fish to avoid adverse population impacts

•If this = 50% of the total sturgeon vessel-strike mortalities (and were all females), then the sturgeon population would need to be larger than 720 female fish, to avoid adverse impacts

RecommendationsRecommendationsDetection/ResearchDetection/Research

DetectionDetection Directed ground or aerial surveysDirected ground or aerial surveys Outreach to request public’s assistance in Outreach to request public’s assistance in

reporting carcassesreporting carcasses Creation of a centralized database for the Creation of a centralized database for the

Atlantic CoastAtlantic Coast Trawl behind vessels to detect carcassesTrawl behind vessels to detect carcasses

RecommendationsRecommendationsPrevention/MitigationPrevention/Mitigation

Reduced speed for ships during spawning Reduced speed for ships during spawning seasonseason Proven effective for marine mammalsProven effective for marine mammals Reduces the force of collision impacts Reduces the force of collision impacts Allows animals more time to detect and avoid Allows animals more time to detect and avoid

oncoming vessels oncoming vessels

RecommendationsRecommendationsPrevention/Mitigation Prevention/Mitigation

Diverting sturgeon from channelDiverting sturgeon from channel SoundSound

Ultrasound found effective in controlling the behavior of clupeids—no indication that sturgeon would be capable of detecting ultrasound

Light Light such as mercury and strobe lights can be used

to attract some species and divert others Scent

Attracts sturgeon for feeding and reproduction

Current researchCurrent research

Delaware Fish & Wildlife continues to Delaware Fish & Wildlife continues to monitor mortalitiesmonitor mortalities

Delaware Fish & Wildlife and Delaware Delaware Fish & Wildlife and Delaware State University are conducting gillnetting State University are conducting gillnetting and telemetry studies using acoustic and telemetry studies using acoustic transmitters (including depth sensing tags) transmitters (including depth sensing tags) Identify spawning groundsIdentify spawning grounds Identify depths sturgeon utilizeIdentify depths sturgeon utilize

Delaware Deepening ProjectDelaware Deepening Project

Army Corps of Army Corps of Engineers plans to Engineers plans to deepen main channel deepen main channel

by 5 feet from Bay by 5 feet from Bay mouth to Philadelphiamouth to Philadelphia

165 km165 km Larger vessels will Larger vessels will

transit the estuarytransit the estuary Increase in container Increase in container

and cargo vesselsand cargo vessels

OutlineOutline Biography/BackgroundBiography/Background Coastal/Anadromous fishCoastal/Anadromous fish




Growth characteristics and salt tolerance Growth characteristics and salt tolerance of a nonnative invasive population of the of a nonnative invasive population of the common reed common reed Phragmites australisPhragmites australis

Coastal Habitat Degradation from Coastal Habitat Degradation from Invasive SpeciesInvasive Species

Phragmites australis Phragmites australis (common reed)(common reed)

A tall (to over 4m), A tall (to over 4m), emergent wetland grass emergent wetland grass

World-wide distributionWorld-wide distribution Native to U.S.Native to U.S. A population from Eurasia A population from Eurasia

has invaded US estuaries has invaded US estuaries dominated by dominated by Spartina Spartina alternifloraalterniflora

Haplotype—haploid Haplotype—haploid genotypegenotype

The ProblemThe Problem

Wide-spread expansion of nonnative Wide-spread expansion of nonnative Phragmites Phragmites australisaustralis in coastal marshes in New England and in coastal marshes in New England and mid-Atlantic statesmid-Atlantic states

(Not as widespread in the Southeast)(Not as widespread in the Southeast)

Displacing coastal Displacing coastal Spartina alternifloraSpartina alterniflora marshes marshes

Once established, difficult to eradicateOnce established, difficult to eradicate

Spartina alternifloraSpartina alterniflora (smooth cordgrass) (smooth cordgrass)

The problemThe problem

Phragmites marshes less valuable habitat than Phragmites marshes less valuable habitat than spartina marshesspartina marshes Less habitat for fishes Less habitat for fishes

Spartina marshes important habitat for Spartina marshes important habitat for Fundulus Fundulus heteroclitusheteroclitus (mummichog) (mummichog)

Mummichog is a key prey species for estuarine fishesMummichog is a key prey species for estuarine fishes

Reduced habitat valueReduced habitat value for birds for birds Reduced plant diversityReduced plant diversity

How does phragmites invade?How does phragmites invade?

(Able et al. 2003)

M - Haplotype F - Haplotype

Photo: Bob Meadows, 2005

M-Haplotype(Invasive)

F-Haplotype(Native)

Research questionsResearch questions

Why is the invasive M population Why is the invasive M population different?different?

Why has it become invasive and the native Why has it become invasive and the native populations have not?populations have not?

Can this information be used in managing Can this information be used in managing phragmites?phragmites?

Research objectivesResearch objectives

Compare the salinity tolerance and Compare the salinity tolerance and growth characteristics of the growth characteristics of the introduced haplotype of phragmites introduced haplotype of phragmites with:with: Two native haplotypesTwo native haplotypes Spartina alternifloraSpartina alterniflora

Source of plant materialSource of plant material

Rhizome sections of Rhizome sections of

P. australisP. australis were were

collected from populations in collected from populations in

Delaware and MarylandDelaware and Maryland

Samples included Samples included

two nativetwo native

haplotypes (F & AC) haplotypes (F & AC)

and the introducedand the introduced

invasive invasive

haplotype (M)haplotype (M)

AC

F

Compare invasive phragmites to native phragmites and spartina under common garden conditions along a salinity gradient

Relative Salt Tolerance of Spartina alternifloraand Phragmites australis Haplotypes

Pot Salinity (M NaCl)

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Gro

wth

(%

of

Max

imum

)

0

20

40

60

80

100S. alterniflora

M Haplotype Exp. 2

M HaplotypeExp. 1

AC Haplotype

F Haplotype

50% Max

ConclusionsConclusions The invasive M haplotype of phragmites differs in

ecophysiology from the native haplotypes

Exhibits a greater rate of shoot initiation and biomass accumulationExhibits a greater rate of shoot initiation and biomass accumulation Appears to be adapted to a weedy growth strategyAppears to be adapted to a weedy growth strategy More salt tolerant than native populationsMore salt tolerant than native populations

Has allowed this population to invade salt mashesHas allowed this population to invade salt mashes

M haplotype not as salt tolerant as spartinaM haplotype not as salt tolerant as spartina But can invade salt marshes with reduced salinityBut can invade salt marshes with reduced salinity

M haplotype performs well at intermediate salinitiesM haplotype performs well at intermediate salinities Special niche for the M haplotypeSpecial niche for the M haplotype

Reasons for invasion on the Atlantic CoastReasons for invasion on the Atlantic Coast

Shoreline developmentShoreline development

Removal of upland woody vegetationRemoval of upland woody vegetation

No plants to remove freshwater via evapotranspirationNo plants to remove freshwater via evapotranspiration

Greater freshwater input to marshes leads to lower salinityGreater freshwater input to marshes leads to lower salinity

Lowered salinity allows M haplotype to invadeLowered salinity allows M haplotype to invade

Tidal restrictionTidal restriction

Dikes, levees, and poorly designed water-control structures Dikes, levees, and poorly designed water-control structures

Poor flushing, fresh-water build-upPoor flushing, fresh-water build-up

Allows M haplotype to colonizeAllows M haplotype to colonize

Restoration & Control OpportunitiesRestoration & Control OpportunitiesM HaplotypeM Haplotype

Before undertaking control, identify the origin of the Before undertaking control, identify the origin of the population—don’t eradicate native populations!population—don’t eradicate native populations!

Plant/ restore upland vegetation bufferPlant/ restore upland vegetation buffer Require developers to preserve an upland vegetation buffer Require developers to preserve an upland vegetation buffer

(>10 m)(>10 m)

Breach diked salt marshesBreach diked salt marshes

Conventional control (herbicides, burning, etc.)Conventional control (herbicides, burning, etc.)

Complete eradication of M haplotype highly unlikelyComplete eradication of M haplotype highly unlikely

OutlineOutline Coastal/anadromous fishCoastal/anadromous fish


Navigation—Vessel strike mortality in Atlantic sturgeonNavigation—Vessel strike mortality in Atlantic sturgeon Disease—striped bass mycobacteriosisDisease—striped bass mycobacteriosis Coastal fish habitat degradation from invasive speciesCoastal fish habitat degradation from invasive species


Hydroelectric dams and fish passageHydroelectric dams and fish passageRestoring anadromous fish around damsRestoring anadromous fish around dams

Essex DamEssex DamLawrence, MassLawrence, Mass

Utility companies required to provide upstream and downstream fish Utility companies required to provide upstream and downstream fish passage at damspassage at dams

Construction of fishways renewed interested in fish restorationConstruction of fishways renewed interested in fish restoration

Fish lifts and ladders

Goals in fish passageGoals in fish passage

Primary Goal: reestablish runs to historic or Primary Goal: reestablish runs to historic or sustainable numberssustainable numbers

Providing access to historical spawning habitat Providing access to historical spawning habitat will result in increased population sizeswill result in increased population sizes

Technical goal: maximize passage, minimize Technical goal: maximize passage, minimize delays, transit time, stress, and energetic and delays, transit time, stress, and energetic and reproductive costsreproductive costs

Problems with conducting Problems with conducting restoration on dammed riversrestoration on dammed rivers

Fish lifts/ladders are inefficientFish lifts/ladders are inefficient

Fishways don’t pass many species, i.e. sturgeon, eel, Fishways don’t pass many species, i.e. sturgeon, eel, rainbow smelt, striped bassrainbow smelt, striped bass

Increased energetic costs for shadIncreased energetic costs for shad Reduction in repeat spawning femalesReduction in repeat spawning females Decreases in the mean size and age of adult fish Decreases in the mean size and age of adult fish Lower population fecundity and probably lower annual recruitmentLower population fecundity and probably lower annual recruitment

Predation at base of dams (striped bass)Predation at base of dams (striped bass)

Downstream mortality of outmigrating fish through turbinesDownstream mortality of outmigrating fish through turbines

Restoring anadromous fish on Restoring anadromous fish on dammed riversdammed rivers

Does it work?Does it work?

Look at Merrimack River and other Look at Merrimack River and other dammed riversdammed rivers ConnecticutConnecticut SusquehannaSusquehanna

Historic Fish PopulationsHistoric Fish PopulationsMerrimack RiverMerrimack River

Atlantic salmon ~30,000Atlantic salmon ~30,000 American shad hundreds of thousands to American shad hundreds of thousands to

millionsmillions River herring millions to ten of millionsRiver herring millions to ten of millions We attempt to restore fish populations to We attempt to restore fish populations to

some percentage of these historical some percentage of these historical populationspopulations

Merrimack RiverMerrimack River

177 km long177 km long Drains 13000 sq. km Drains 13000 sq. km Multiple mainstem dams Multiple mainstem dams

with fish passage facilitieswith fish passage facilities

Connecticut RiverConnecticut River

Largest river in New

England 645 km long Drains 28,000 sq. km Multiple mainstem

hydropower dams with

fish passage facilities

Susquehanna River

715 km long

Drains 71,000 sq. km

Largest tributary to Chesapeake Bay

Largest U.S. river that drains into the Atlantic Ocean

Multiple mainstem hydropower dams with fish passage facilities

American shad passage at American shad passage at Merrimack River damsMerrimack River dams

17% of the shad that pass the first dam pass the second dam

American shad passage at Merrimack River Dams

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Essex Pawtucket Amoskeag

American shad passage at Connecticut American shad passage at Connecticut River damsRiver dams


American shad passage at Connecticut River Dams

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Holyoke Turners Falls Vernon

American shad passage at Susquehanna American shad passage at Susquehanna River damsRiver dams


American shad passage at Susquehanna River dams

0

25,000

50,000

75,000

100,000

125,000

150,000

175,000

200,000

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Conowingo Holtwood Safe Harbor York Haven

American shad returnsAmerican shad returns

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Connecticut River American shad

Merrimack River American shad

Susquehanna River American shad

So, does it work?So, does it work?

Has worked in bringing some fish back to Has worked in bringing some fish back to their historical spawning habitat where their historical spawning habitat where they were excluded by damsthey were excluded by dams

No good evidence of successfully No good evidence of successfully restoring fish populations to “ecologically restoring fish populations to “ecologically significant” levels on Atlantic coastal rivers significant” levels on Atlantic coastal rivers with multiple main stem damswith multiple main stem dams

What is the trade-off for What is the trade-off for restoring around dams?restoring around dams?

DamsDams Produce electricityProduce electricity Provide for recreationProvide for recreation Source for drinking waterSource for drinking water

Value (benefit)Value (benefit)

First seven dams on Merrimack 80 MW First seven dams on Merrimack 80 MW maximum capacitymaximum capacity

Provides about 0.2% of New England’s Provides about 0.2% of New England’s electricity (6 state region)electricity (6 state region)

Powers about 0.5% of New England’s homesPowers about 0.5% of New England’s homes

Total Value= $20,519,381Total Value= $20,519,381

Costs of current arrangementCosts of current arrangement

USFWS and state restoration programsUSFWS and state restoration programs ~$1 million/year~$1 million/year

Lost fish productionLost fish production ????

Consider dam removal?Consider dam removal?

Potential for fish populations to rebound to Potential for fish populations to rebound to near historical numbers?near historical numbers?

Costs of dam removalCosts of dam removal

Value of foregone hydropower Value of foregone hydropower productionproduction

Dam removal costs – small to very large Dam removal costs – small to very large Uncertain who pays for dam removalUncertain who pays for dam removal

Foregone aesthetic and recreational Foregone aesthetic and recreational benefits (primarily associated with the benefits (primarily associated with the impoundments)impoundments)

EconomicsEconomics

Decisions to remove dams usually not Decisions to remove dams usually not made on basis of cost-benefit analysis made on basis of cost-benefit analysis (e.g., Elwa River, WA)(e.g., Elwa River, WA)

Way forwardWay forward

Continue current restoration effortsContinue current restoration efforts Allows fish access to historic spawning Allows fish access to historic spawning

groundsgrounds Generate economic benefit of hydropower Generate economic benefit of hydropower

productionproduction Continue to work with dam owners to Continue to work with dam owners to

modify/improve fishway operationsmodify/improve fishway operations Probably won’t see fish populations return to Probably won’t see fish populations return to

historical levelshistorical levels May impact rebuilding populations of marine May impact rebuilding populations of marine

fish that feed on shad and river herringfish that feed on shad and river herring

Way forwardWay forward

Consider planting the seed of dam removal?Consider planting the seed of dam removal? Penobscot River, Maine as a modelPenobscot River, Maine as a model A trust purchased three dams from the dam ownersA trust purchased three dams from the dam owners Remove the two lower-most dams on the river Remove the two lower-most dams on the river Construct a state-of-the-art fish bypass around the Construct a state-of-the-art fish bypass around the

third damthird dam Give power company the opportunity to increase Give power company the opportunity to increase

generation at six existing dams, which would result in generation at six existing dams, which would result in more than 90% of the current energy generation more than 90% of the current energy generation being maintainedbeing maintained

ConclusionsConclusions

Atlantic sturgeon face a difficult road to recoveryAtlantic sturgeon face a difficult road to recovery

Invasive species will continue to present a Invasive species will continue to present a challenge to fish and coastal habitat restoration challenge to fish and coastal habitat restoration programs and will be difficult to eradicateprograms and will be difficult to eradicate

Shift focus from fishways to dam removals to Shift focus from fishways to dam removals to restore anadromous fish populationsrestore anadromous fish populations

ThailandThailand Sustainable aquacultureSustainable aquaculture

Restoration of abandoned pondsRestoration of abandoned ponds Best Management PracticesBest Management Practices

Coastal restoration/planningCoastal restoration/planning Estuarine ecologyEstuarine ecology Wetland/mangrove ecologyWetland/mangrove ecology Fisheries management/policyFisheries management/policy Marine conservationMarine conservation Invasive speciesInvasive species

CollaboratorsCollaborators

Atlantic sturgeonAtlantic sturgeon Greg Murphy, Delaware Division of Fish & Greg Murphy, Delaware Division of Fish &

WildlifeWildlife

PhragmitesPhragmites Ed Vasquez, Ed Glenn, Steve Nelson, Ed Vasquez, Ed Glenn, Steve Nelson,

University of ArizonaUniversity of Arizona Glenn Guntenspergen, US Geological SurveyGlenn Guntenspergen, US Geological Survey

Thank you!Thank you!

Egg Per Recruit ModelEgg Per Recruit Model

1

1

)(

2

i

t

MVSi

n

ii

teEPR

nn = oldest spawning age, = oldest spawning age, λλ = the proportion of females that are mature at age i, = the proportion of females that are mature at age i, φi = mean fecundity of a female at age Iφi = mean fecundity of a female at age IVSVS = instantaneous rate of vessel-strike mortality during the period t = instantaneous rate of vessel-strike mortality during the period tMM = instantaneous natural mortality rate = instantaneous natural mortality rate

AssumptionsAssumptionsMaximum age of 60 years Maximum age of 60 years Constant M of 0.07 over all ages Constant M of 0.07 over all ages Fishing and bycatch mortality rates equal to zeroFishing and bycatch mortality rates equal to zeroSturgeon are vulnerable to vessel-strikes starting at age 3 Sturgeon are vulnerable to vessel-strikes starting at age 3 Vessel-strike mortality rates that reduced maximum egg production by more than Vessel-strike mortality rates that reduced maximum egg production by more than 50% were unsustainable50% were unsustainable

Travel

Ai Tshort