Category Archives: Conservation

Hurricane Impact on Fishing

Hurricane Impact on Estuary Gamefish

Though hurricanes can be hell for human residents of coastal areas, a new Texas study seems to indicate that they are not harmful to inshore fish, and may even be helpful.

By Evan Pettis | Biologist, Aransas Bay Marine Lab, Texas Parks & Wildlife
from The Fishing Wir

Figure 1. Catch rates of red drum and spotted seatrout in TPWD fall gill nets. Figure 2. Angler catch rates of red drum and spotted seatrout.

Catch rates of red drum and spotted seatrout

On August 25, 2017, Hurricane Harvey made landfall as a category four storm in the small fishing community of Rockport. Winds as high as 150 mph and a storm surge in excess of seven feet battered the town before the storm moved inland and unleashed record-breaking quantities of rain along the Texas coast. The economically important commercial and recreational fisheries were certainly not spared from the devastation left in the wake of this historic storm. A preliminary assessment conducted by Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) estimated that damages to the state’s fishing operations and fishing-related businesses exceeds $58 million.

As a biologist working in “Hurricane Harvey ground-zero,” a common question I’ve fielded from concerned constituents is “What are the ecological impacts of the storm on the fisheries of the Coastal Bend?”

It’s well-documented that major storms like Harvey can have lasting effects on estuarine communities. The greatest threat to shallow-water species is the rapid disruption of normal salinity regimes via highly saline storm surges followed by excessive freshwater inflows. Paired with increased organic loading, these hydrological changes can result in low-oxygen conditions that trigger fish kills. Fortunately, for the Aransas Bay system, these changes were highly localized and relatively short-lasting.

Hurricanes also impact the habitats that marine species rely upon. In the Coastal Bend, many oyster reefs were broken up by intense wave action and, in some spots, buried under thick layers of silt and debris. Seagrass beds, mangroves, and salt marshes also suffered considerable losses due to high winds and powerful waves. It will be quite some time before we fully understand how the effects of this habitat degradation propagate up the food chain. Fortunately, data from TPWD monitoring programs indicate that the immediate impacts on popular bait species (i.e. blue crabs, shrimp, and Atlantic croaker) were minimal.

Currently, recreationally and commercially important finfish appear to have actually benefited from the storm. Relief for these species comes by means of reduced harvest pressure. Local anglers were preoccupied with recovery and repairs and faced numerous obstacles to wetting a line in the wake of the storm. Public access to the bays was limited as boat ramps and fishing piers were damaged, and losses to private and for-hire vessels was extensive. Significant damage to bait stands and commercial shrimp boats also made bait difficult to procure. Lastly, visiting anglers struggled to find hotel accommodations in the months following Harvey.

To monitor fishing pressure and total landings, TPWD routinely conducts angler surveys and trailer counts at boat ramps. In September 2017, we documented an 85% decline in boating activity in the Aransas Bay system compared to 2016.We intercepted an average of only two fishing trip interviews per survey, down from 16 the previous year. In fact, more than half of September’s angler surveys had no fishing trip interviews. Fishing activity bounced back over the next few months, but still remains below average.

So what impact did reduced angler pressure have on our local fish populations?

To answer that question, we looked at data collected during TPWD’s biannual gill net sampling program. For our two most popular game fish, spotted seatrout and red drum, the results were extremely promising (Figure 1).

In the months following the storm, red drum were caught in the nets at a rate of 0.81 fish/hr, up from 0.67 fish/hr in 2016 and close to the 10-year average. Spotted seatrout were caught at a rate of 0.41 fish/hr, a huge improvement over 2016 (0.22 fish/hr) and the 10-year average (0.29 fish/hr). This data implies that these species are actually more abundant in Aransas Bay following Hurricane Harvey.

Moreover, data collected at angler surveys indicates that the higher abundances track well with higher catch-rates for sports fishermen (Figure 2).

Anglers were landing red drum at higher rates in September 2017 compared to the previous year, and at much higher rates than the 10-year average in October and November. Spotted seatrout were being caught at roughly twice the rate as the previous year and the 10-year average from September through November. Though still too early to say conclusively, it appears as though these trends have continued into the spring.

To better understand the long-term effects of Hurricane Harvey, TPWD will continue to closely monitor our fisheries in the coming months and years. Though we usually perceive hurricanes as purely destructive, it’s important to note that they are a recurring natural force acting along the Gulf of Mexico. Our ecological communities, including our highly-prized finfish, have evolved and adapted in response to these large storm systems and, as our data shows, can actually benefit from the occasional disturbance.

Recovery efforts in Rockport and the surrounding areas are making daily progress, and the local fishing community is gradually returning to normalcy. Boat ramps, marinas, bait stands, and fishing guides are rapidly getting back to business, partly due to funding set aside for Federal Fisheries Disaster relief. So if you find yourself with that burning desire to bend a rod, grab your fishing license and head down to the Coastal Bend. Aransas Bay is open for business and the bite is on!

How Spotted Bass Ruin A Lake

Growing up in the 1950s and 60s, fishing was a warm weather sport. We fished from March through August and hunted September through February. I never knew bass would bite in the winter until I joined the Spalding County Sportsman Club in 1974 and fished an October tournament that year and a January tournament the next year.

If memory serves me right, we caught a lot of bass at Sinclair. But that was not really a surprise since the weather was still warm. But the January tournament was a big surprise. On a freezing day with sleet, my partner landed a six-pound bass at Jackson, one of six over six pounds weighed in that day.

I landed one small keeper largemouth on a chrome Hellbender, one of the few crankbaits we had back then. There were only largemouth in the lake.
The days of consistently catching quality largemouth at Jackson are long gone, as tournament results show. In the late 1980s sewage from Atlanta that used to flow into the lake down the South River, keeping it fertilized like a farm pond, was diverted.

Even worse, well-intentioned but clueless fishermen midnight stocked spotted bass in the lake. Now they dominate the bass population. Spots grow more slowly than largemouth, don’t get as big, and dominate the habitat since they are more aggressive.

Some examples of the changes over the years. I landed my first two eight pounders in January tournaments at Jackson in the 1970s, and the second one was third biggest fish that day. I landed my biggest bass ever, a 9.4 pounder, in a February tournament there.

In a March tournament I had fourth biggest fish with a 7.4 pounder. There was one just over eight pounds and a 9.1 pounder. But big fish was a 9.2 pounder. In a tournament with Larry Stubbs, I netted a 7.4 pounder for him then he netted a 7.5 pounder for me! There are many more examples like that.

I landed an 8.8 pounder in 2001 in a January tournament, but that is the last fish I can remember over six pounds, and there had been none I can remember for several years before it. If we didn’t have at least one six pounder back then it was a bad day.

Spots are fun to catch but totally change a lake. There is no size limit on them anywhere in the state except Lanier, and biologists encourage fishermen to keep a ten fish limit every time they can to eat.

I brought home as many as I could after our last tournament. The small ones are easy to filet and taste great. It is unusual to catch one over three pounds and removing as many as possible may help the lake a little.

Integrating Red Snapper Data

NOAA Fisheries, Gulf States Prioritize Integrating Red Snapper Data

At a recent workshop, Marine Recreational Information Program partners discussed how data collected by general and specialized recreational fishing surveys can help deliver more timely and precise catch estimates for Gulf red snapper.
From The Fishing Wire

Red snapper grow big

Photo courtesy of FWC Fish and Wildlife Research Institute.
The Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) partnership took another step toward delivering more timely and precise estimates of Gulf of Mexico recreational red snapper catch and effort. At a September workshop co-hosted by MRIP and the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission, scientists and managers from state agencies, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, NOAA Fisheries, and independent statistical consultants sought to identify the best way to use data collected by specialized and general state-federal surveys to monitor recreational catches of Gulf red snapper, as needed to support stock assessments and fishery management.

The Red Snapper Survey Designs Workshop IV was the latest in a series, dating back to 2014, focused on finding ways to better monitor catches during short federal and state fishing seasons for one of the Gulf’s most popular fish. NOAA Fisheries and its Gulf state and regional partners have spent the past several years working closely to develop survey designs that address federal and state management needs for more timely and statistically precise catch statistics.

Since last December, NOAA Fisheries has certified designs for three surveys in the Gulf of Mexico: Louisiana’s all species, general survey, LA Creel; Mississippi’s red snapper-specific Tails n’ Scales; and Alabama’s red snapper-specific Snapper Check. Florida’s Gulf Reef Fish Survey, which supplements MRIP’s general surveys for a limited group of reef fish species, is expected to be certified later this year. Each survey uses a different methodology to gather data and produce estimates based on the unique characteristics of the state’s fishery.

“This is all part of a comprehensive, collaborative, and rigorous process to ensure sound and effective science and management of Gulf red snapper,” said Gregg Bray, GulfFIN program coordinator for the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission. “It’s so important to have the leadership and local knowledge of the states, the collaborative strength of GulfFIN, and the financial and technical resources of NOAA Fisheries. That’s the real value of the MRIP partnership.”

The MRIP state surveys are designed to improve regional monitoring of the recreational red snapper catch and effort. Estimates from these surveys can be used for federal scientific stock assessments and fishery management once there is a transition plan that describes how to integrate state and general data, and how to calibrate new and historical catch and effort estimates.

During the workshop, participants were introduced to several options for integrating data collected by the specialized and general MRIP surveys and for calibrating estimates generated by the new integrated survey approaches against estimates based only on the general surveys. Calibrations will be needed to ensure that red snapper catch estimates produced by different survey designs can be converted into a common currency for use in stock assessments and management.

As a next step, the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission will coordinate the delivery of survey data and estimates to a team of independent statistical consultants who will explore the integration and calibration methodologies put forward at the workshop. The need for a follow-up workshop to present and discuss the results of the analysis is under consideration for early 2019. A workshop summary is being prepared and consultants are expected to provide a report following the completion of their analysis.

Goliath Grouper Study

Florida FWC Uses Telemetry in Goliath Grouper Study
from The Fishing Wire

Goliath Groupers grow big!

Photo Credit Florida International University
Acoustic telemetry is used to measure impacts of catch-and-release fishing on Goliath grouper and to determine behavior patterns of this federally protected species.

Goliath grouper (Serranidae: Epinephelus itajara) occur in tropical and subtropical waters from the west coast of Africa to the east coast of Florida, south to Brazil, and throughout the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea. One of the world’s largest groupers, this species can grow to over 7 feet long, exceed 750 pounds, and live at least 37 years. Goliath grouper grow slowly, mature relatively late (4-6 years old), and aggregate to spawn.

Harvest of goliath grouper was prohibited in U.S. waters in 1990 after a noted decline in population numbers. In 1994, they were listed as critically endangered on the IUCN World Conservation Union’s Red List of Threatened Species (www.iucnredlist.org). Goliath grouper are currently protected from harvest in U.S. waters though there are fisheries for goliath grouper in some countries. The status of the species throughout its entire geographic range is unclear and there are many factors that increase goliath’s susceptibility to overfishing. For more information regarding goliath grouper biology and regulations, please visit the Goliath Grouper Web section.

Protection from harvest does not ensure that fishing mortality is negligible. Recreational fishing charters throughout Florida advertise goliath grouper as a prime target species for catch-and-release fishing. A fish of this size produces a challenging and exciting fight on rod and reel. Goliath grouper are also often caught unintentionally during angling efforts for other reef species. While their primary diet consists of slow moving, bottom-dwelling species, they are opportunistic predators that occasionally feed upon a struggling fish being reeled in by anglers.

To date, the effects of catch-and-release angling on goliath grouper have not been established. As with many reef fish, angling at deeper depths may result in gas expansion and extensive boat-side handling that can cause injury or mortality. Additionally, goliath grouper often remain at the same sites for extended periods, so repeated capture events may affect their survival at heavily fished sites.

Goals

The primary goals of the goliath grouper telemetry program are twofold:

To describe the effects of catch-and-release angling on the survival of goliath grouper across a range of depths.
To quantify the long-term behavioral patterns and residence times of goliath grouper within the study area.
Acoustic telemetry and conventional tagging will be used to assess both immediate and long-term effects of catch-and-release angling and to provide data regarding residency and behavior of this protected species. Goliath grouper are known to remain in the same area for extended periods, and they have a tendency to aggregate around habitat such as shipwrecks. The monitored shipwrecks in this study (Figure 1) have been chosen based on ongoing research that indicates consistent goliath grouper presence. Quantitatively assessing the effects of catch-and-release angling for goliath grouper, in addition to continued investigation into population dynamics, movement patterns, and stock structure, will provide valuable information for future management or regulation.

Methods

Goliath grouper are caught using typical recreational fishing gear. Once at the surface, goliath grouper are left in the water and positioned at the side of the boat so that they can be measured, photographed, and fitted with tags. Two external tags are inserted just beneath the dorsal fin. The first is a conventional ID tag (Figure 2), and the second is an acoustic transmitter, or “pinger” (Figure 3). Each pinger has its own unique code that will allow for the identification of individual fish. Goliath grouper are tracked manually immediately after release, which provides information regarding short-term survival and behavior after a catch-and-release event.

Two to four acoustic receivers (hydrophones) are permanently deployed at each monitored shipwreck. Each receiver has a listening area of approximately 500,000 square meters, or 124 acres. Whenever a tagged fish swims within listening range (Figure 4), a hydrophone will record the fish’s individual ID as well as the time, date, and depth of the fish within the water column. These data will yield information regarding long-term movements and behavioral patterns of goliath grouper at the study sites.

Conventional external ID tags are attached to each goliath grouper to provide recapture/resighting data through diver surveys and angler recapture reports. Any tagged fish that are observed should be reported to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s (FWC) Angler Tag Return Hotline, 800-367-4461. Researchers need to know the date and location of the sighting and the relative condition of the fish.

Movement and behavioral data will indicate the effects of catch-and-release fishing on this reef species. Minimum estimates of survival immediately after a catch-and-release event can be assessed. Long-term acoustic telemetry data will allow for estimates of residence time for individuals at specific sites. Continued underwater surveys will provide further information regarding abundance, size distribution, and seasonal patterns for goliath grouper within the study area. It is the goal of this project to synthesize these data for a better understanding of goliath grouper biology and ecology that can support the development of responsible and effective management.

To learn more about our telemetry studies, visit the Acoustic Telemetry Research section.

How Are Biologists Keeping Tabs on Migratory Sportfish?

Keeping Tabs on Migratory Sportfish

Seaguar continues its support of Gray FishTrag Research roosterfish study
from The Fishing Wire

Tagging Rooster Fish

New York, NY ( – There has never been a more critical time to learn about the marine fisheries that we rely upon for sport and commerce. Such research faces significant headwinds, as many of the target pelagic species frequently migrate hundreds, if not thousands, of miles during the course of their lives, and public resources to support detailed population studies are limited. Nevertheless, anglers and scientists have forged a unique partnership – Gray FishTag Research – in an effort to gather high-quality data on marine fish population dynamics, migration patterns, growth rates, habitat preferences, and more.

Seaguar, the originators of fluorocarbon fishing line, is proud to support the efforts of Gray FishTag Research to study and protect sustainable marine fisheries around the world.

Gray FishTag Research is a non-profit organization, leading an international and fully interactive fish tagging program powered by the world’s largest network of fishing professionals, consisting of approximately 10,000 charter boat captains and mates. Tags are deployed on fish that are caught and subsequently released; data are collected when a tagged fish is recaptured, or from pop-off satellite tags that record data electronically and then “pop off” the tagged fish after a predetermined about of time. Fish tagging and recovery data is made available, free of charge, to any interested parties through the Gray FishTag Research website.

Seaguar sponsors a unique Roosterfish study off the coast of Costa Rica in memory of long-time Seaguar sales manager, John DeVries. Tagged roosterfish are fitted with pop-off satellite tags, and data collected from the tags after popping off the roosterfish yields detailed information about the tagged fish’s movements, both horizontal and vertical, during the time that the tag remained attached. Recently, Gray FishTag Research announced the recovery of not one, but two pop-off satellite tags that were deployed during a Seaguar-supported tagging expedition:

The first PSAT tag, on a fish named “Las Gatos”, was deployed on April 28, 2018 and popped-off 58 days later. Not only was data transmitted by the tag after pop-off, but the tag itself was actually recovered, found by a local angler who recognized the importance of his discovery and returned the tag to Gray FishTag Research for more detailed analysis.
The second PSAT tag, on a fish named “Nicaragua”, was deployed on June 9, 2018 and popped-off 17 days later, off of the southern coast of Nicaragua. This fish traveled an amazing and noteworthy distance of at least 228 miles during the 17 days that the PSAT tag remained attached to the fish.
Seaguar also supports the work of Gray FishTag Research to enhance our understanding of swordfish movements and population dynamics through a fish tagging and recovery study. Recently, a tagged swordfish that entered the study in late 2017 was recovered, nearly eight months and 500 miles later!
On December 16, 2017 a swordfish was tagged by angler Anthony DiMare while fishing with Captain Nick Stanczyk aboard the Broad Minded charter boat out of Islamorada, Florida. The swordfish was estimated to be 47 inches in length and had an approximate weight of 50 lbs. On August 11, 2018, a full 238 days later, that swordfish was recaptured by NOAA observer McKenzie O’Connor while aboard PLL Vessel Ellen Jean. The recapture location was approximately 475 miles away from the tagging location. The measured length of the recaptured fish was 55 inches, and it now weighed 96 lbs.

Gray FishTag Research is an essential tool for promoting the sustainability of marine game fish and increasing public resource awareness. All fish species in every ocean are being monitored, including billfish, sharks, general offshore and inshore fish species. The program collects information in real-time by providing a direct connection between anglers and the scientific community, in every part of the world.

Seaguar is proud to continue our support of Gray FishTag Research as it yields unique and invaluable data about our most important marine fisheries. The dedicated anglers who capture, tag, and release fish as part of the study, and the diligent scientists who process, analyze, and report tagged fish data, are the perfect embodiment of Seaguar’s motto; just like our lines and leaders, these professionals are Always the Best!

Oregon Working Landscape Project

Oregon Working Landscape Project
from The Fishing Wire

Construction Completed on Oregon Working Landscape Project Benefiting Farmers, Fish

Winter Lake Channels

Unique partnership of federal, state, tribal and local agencies, the agriculture industry, and environmental community worked together on a mutually beneficial habitat restoration project supporting salmon recovery.

Aerial view of construction of new habitat channels at Winter Lake. Credit BCI Contracting, Inc.

Partners representing natural resource, tribal, and agricultural stakeholders recently gathered in the Coquille River Valley in Oregon. They celebrated the completion of the Winter Lake restoration project, which will help ensure local cattle farmers continue to thrive. The project will also provide almost 8 miles of tidal channels and 1,700 acres of habitat for the threatened Oregon Coast coho salmon, and other fish and wildlife.

Habitat restoration and agriculture are often considered competing interests.This partnership between natural resource entities and agricultural landowners demonstrates that the two can benefit from a strategically planned project.

Cows Where Fish Will Be

Cows grazing on land that will be transformed to fish habitat in the winter.

Lowlands in and around the Valley’s Beaver Slough Drainage District are rich pasture for cattle, and are in high demand. In the past, levees were built, channels straightened, and acres of wetlands were filled to create agricultural land.

But the tidal gates managing water and helping keep the land dry for grazing started failing recently and had to be replaced. The Drainage District saw this opportunity to establish a new partnership to reimagine how water is managed there.

Their vision of “working landscapes” was to improve water control and protect the land from flooding during prime grazing season in the warmer months, and rebuild high-quality habitat for juvenile coho salmon in the winter.

Cute Sign

Where “we grow beef in the summer and fish in the winter.”

The project’s cornerstone is a set of new state-of-the-art tide gates that can better control flooding—allowing for seasonal use by agriculture, and fish and wildlife. The tide gates, working with reconnected channels and new habitat will provide the best of both worlds.

NOAA helped Beaver Slough Drainage District, the Nature Conservancy, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and nearby land owner China Creek Gun Club develop plans for this comprehensive project. We supported it further with restoration and resilience grants totaling $2.7 million.

Water Control Project

Aerial view of the Winter Lake project’s new tide gates. BCI Contracting, Inc.

It is expected that the project could generate up to $3.4 million and 25 new jobs in the regional economy. It could then contribute an additional $3.2 million due to increased outdoor recreation spending over a twenty-year period.

Along the Pacific Northwest coast, wild salmon populations continue to decline. Like many northwestern rivers, the Coquille has lost much of its estuary habitat. Nearly 95 percent of prime salmon spawning and rearing waters there are gone.

Habitat restoration through innovative public-private partnership projects like this are the key to success. They eventually will assist in the recovery of salmon and other fish species critical to this region’s ecosystems and communities.

Remote Pond Survey Project

Maine’s Remote Pond Survey Project

Seasonal Technicians Chris Introne and Dan Perry haul in a gill net while surveying an Unnamed Pond
By MDIFW Fisheries Biologist Merry Gallagher
from The Fishing Wire

Doing a pond survey

The Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Fisheries Division Native Fish Conservation Group completed another successful and perhaps the last summer of remote pond surveys in 2018.

Since 2011, MDIFW has teamed with volunteer anglers from Trout Unlimited and Maine Audubon to systematically survey pond habitats in Maine that had never been surveyed to assess fish community structure, determine basic water quality or aquatic habitat condition. When the effort began, almost 600 presumed ponds were identified from maps as having never been surveyed, but ‘the list’ was eventually pared down to 533 mapped features more indicative of ponds.

The Remote Pond Survey was set up as a two-step process – first, volunteer anglers with Maine Audubon and Trout Unlimited would visit a pond and by following a protocol established by all three partners (IFW, MA, TU) would record valuable information regarding how to access these remote ponds and also provide information on their fishing, such as species caught or detected, evidence of fishing activity occurring at the pond, and observations regarding habitat condition and water quality.

Old log structure

The remains of an old log driving structure on the outlet of Little Bog Pond.

These results provided by anglers contributed to waters being ranked for their likelihood of having wild brook trout populations or being coldwater fish habitat (Table 1) so that IFW biologists could concentrate our efforts on surveying waters that held the most promise for adding additional wild brook trout populations and their habitats to our roster of surveyed waters. The waters that IFW staff survey through a standard protocol estimates fish community structure, develops a basic map of the habitat, estimates pond depth and bathymetry, and measures basic water quality is phase 2 of the process.

Over seven years of effort, the volunteer survey ranked about 460 of the initial 533 remote presumed ponds with a Priority Code and referred that list to MDIFW for potential further action. Since 2012, MDIFW Fishery Biologists have been surveying remote ponds with Priority Codes of 1, 2 or 3. Although a large portion of this effort has been conducted by the Department’s native fish conservation group based in Bangor, regional staff have also conducted a fair share of these surveys and have assisted the Department’s native fish conservation group on occasion over the years.

Pond Brook Trout

Seasonal Technician Dan Perry with some wild brook trout sampled during a remote pond survey.

For the 2018 summer field season, the Department’s native fish conservation group staff conducted 46 remote pond surveys and we have added survey information to MDIFW databases for 196 waters total, of which 95 support previously undocumented populations of wild brook trout, since this effort began. We are thrilled to report that all ponds with a Priority Code of 1 or 2 are now completed and of the ponds remaining on the list, some are scheduled for survey in upcoming years by regional staff, most are ranked with Priority Codes of 4 or 5 and therefore do not likely warrant further effort, and less than 10 ponds with a Priority Code of 3 remain for consideration of future effort.

This has been a very large and dedicated effort by many! It was a monumental task to whittle a list of 533 unsurveyed presumed remote ponds down to a handful remaining in less than ten years. Without the dedication from the many volunteers, MA and TU, IFW staff and leadership, we would not be here today with a now largely completed Remote Pond Survey. Well done all!

Table 1. Priority Codes given to remote ponds based on Volunteer Angler Survey results
1 BKT caught by volunteer or present based on credible evidence
2 BKT possible, unconfirmed report, good water or habitat quality, etc.
3 BKT somewhat possible but not as likely as a Priority 2
4 Little to no expectation of finding BKT
5 Most likely will not be visited because of poor habitat, water quality, etc

Pond Headwaters Survey

Assessing the condition of an inlet to Little Mucalsea Pond as part of our standard pond survey protocol.

Comeback of Greenback Cutthroat

Colorado Parks & Wildlife Works Toward Comeback of Greenback Cutthroat

By Jason Clay, Colorado Parks & Wildlife
from The Fishing Wire

Green Cutthroat Trout making a comeback

HERMAN GULCH, Colo. – Something fishy is taking place up at the headwaters of Clear Creek, and that is exactly what aquatic biologists for Colorado Parks and Wildlife were hoping to see when they went looking for the native greenback cutthroat trout.

The history of the greenbacks has been well documented – they have traversed through turbulent waters and were once thought to be extinct – but now CPW has evidence that Colorado’s state fish is making a successful return in its ancestral waters.

CPW aquatic biologist Boyd Wright and his team has been stocking greenbacks into the Clear Creek headwaters four miles above I-70 near the Eisenhower Tunnel for the past three years.

After a seemingly unsuccessful plant of 4,000 hatchlings in the Herman Gulch stream in 2016 – few had survived the winter – aquatic biologists persisted and their conservation efforts are now paying off.

“It has been a long road with lots of hard work by some really good and passionate people, but it is very gratifying to see these encouraging results for the greenback cutthroat trout,” Wright said on Thursday, Sept.13, following a population survey conducted at Herman Gulch.

Wright and his team replanted greenbacks into the Herman Gulch waters in both 2017 and 2018. They stocked nearly 1,000 one-year-old fish and just under 10,000 young-of-year fish, i.e. hatchlings, in 2017, and another 900 one-year-old fish earlier this summer.

“We’ve documented all of those cohorts of fish here today, which is good,” Wright said streamside sitting at roughly 11,500-feet underneath Pettingell Peak.

For the population survey, Wright and his team took three population samples on the stream, using electroshocking to capture the fish on the chosen 100-yard segments. After netting the fish, they were measured and weighed for documentation, as well as examined to see which planting group and year they came from.

Wright then took the results from the three samples and was able to calculate a population estimate. He found a 30 percent survival/retention rate of the of the 1,000 fish that were stocked at yearlings in 2017 and estimated the total population at 435 fish/mile.

“That may not sound all that well, but it is actually quite good,” Wright said. “We expect that not all of the fish will be able to survive and we set the stocking number accordingly, so I’m really happy to see that level of survival in the system.”

A 30 percent estimated retention rate on the one-year-old greenbacks that have been stocked into the system to date is extremely encouraging.

It could be the start of a massive success story for Colorado’s state fish that has boomed and busted over the past century. Wright is now bullish on the conservation effort for the greenback.

“The long-term goal of this project is to have a self-sustaining population of pure greenback cutthroat trout that doesn’t require any maintenance with stocking,” Wright said. “We are stocking it now to try to load the system up with fish and once we get to the point where we have reached a good density of fish in the system, we’ll stop stocking.”

The target for that is 2019, but in the meantime, Wright and his team are doubling down on their efforts. Two weeks after the population survey, they were back stocking more greenbacks into Herman Gulch.

To get that self-sustaining population, evidence of what biologists call “recruitment” needs to take place. The scientists need to see signs of the fish reproducing.

The first year to look for that evidence will be in 2019 when Wright predicts that the fish they have stocked will be reproductively mature. In 2020, they will be able to tell that the fish that are spawned in 2019 have been recruited into the population.

“I think by 2020 we will have a sense if this is working or not and everything that we know about this system so far, the fish that were here previously were a hybrid cutthroat and they did really well in this stream,” Wright said. “The water temperature is suitable for trout recruitment, we know that, and it’s a pretty productive stream for such a small stream. The expectation is that these fish will do well here.”

###

CPW is an enterprise agency, relying primarily on license sales, state parks fees and registration fees to support its operations, including: 41 state parks and more than 350 wildlife areas covering approximately 900,000 acres, management of fishing and hunting, wildlife watching, camping, motorized and non-motorized trails, boating and outdoor education. CPW’s work contributes approximately $6 billion in total economic impact annually throughout Colorado.

What is Barotrauma?

Try this Simple Solution for Barotrauma in Fish

E. Weeks, South Carolina DNR
from The Fishing Wire

Pressure Release for Barotrauma

Two descending devices – https://youtu.be/agu22ruqX4gdevices (in center): a pressure-activated SeaQualizer and a lower-tech descender (Photo: E. Weeks/SCDNR)

Recently on the blog we looked at a few misconceptions surrounding barotrauma, which occurs when fish reeled in from deep waters experience injuries due to the rapid change in pressure. Barotrauma, which can range from invisible injuries to bloated organs, can kill fish both directly and indirectly, as when they’re unable to escape predators such as sharks or barracudas.

There’s increasing consensus that descending devices are the best way to address this issue, giving released reef fish the greatest odds of survival.

Descending devices can range from the low-tech and DIY (a simple hook or basket set-up with a weight attached) to more expensive, commercially developed tools. But all serve the same purpose: to return fish to a safe depth where they can recover from any ill effects of barotrauma. The use of all descending devices follows the same basic procedure:

Angler reels in a fish from >30 feet of water and may or may not observe signs of barotrauma in the fish.

After deciding to release fish, angler works quickly to dehook the animal.

Angler attaches descending device to fish (either through the hole made by hook, by attaching to lip, or by placing fish in a basket).

Using a hand reel or heavy-duty rod, angler lowers fish back into the depths from which it was caught.

Angler triggers the release mechanism, freeing the descending device from the fish so it can re-acclimate to its environment.

In 2015, the FishAmerica Foundation began working with anglers in the Gulf of Mexico to improve the survival of fish caught in deep waters (such as red snapper) and learn more about the potential for widespread use of descending devices. By asking over 1,100 anglers to test Seaqualizer descending devices, the project ‘saved’ an estimated 3,000-9,000 red snapper that, based on previous research, would otherwise have died due to their barotrauma injuries.

Based on their early success in the Gulf, the FishSmart project has now expanded to look at the impacts of using descending devices by offshore anglers in the South Atlantic. That’s how the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) came to be a partner on this project.

An Opportunity to Try This Yourself Right now, SCDNR is recruiting volunteer anglers who regularly fish for species such as snapper, grouper, or red drum in deep waters. If you’re an offshore angler who cares about improving the survival of reef fish, consider taking part in this program. Anglers who participate in the program will be provided with educational materials and tools for decreasing barotrauma effects, and will be asked to complete two brief surveys over the coming year about how often they used descending devices, how they worked, and whether they have any recommendations for improvement on provided information.If you’re interested in helping conserve deepwater fish by participating in this program, please contact SCDNR’s Morgan Hart at [email protected].

Catch and Release Fishing

To Keep or To Release?
From the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife
from the Fishing Wire

Releasing Trout

If you’re fishing in a catch-and-release-only water body, the decision has been made for you; all fish must be released promptly. But otherwise, you can decide which legally harvestable fish to keep for consumption, which to release, and how to conduct either activity. Many fishing regulations are designed to improve fish growth and size quality, and they are only successful if fish are harvested by anglers. A lack of harvest can cause fish to stunt and not grow. Either way, it’s your job to bring a humane approach to the table. If you decide to release your catch, the following tips will help result in a successful release.

How to safely catch and release

By carefully following these simple instructions, you can release your fish unharmed. If you enjoyed catching your fish, so will the next angler!

Time is of the essence. Play and release the fish as quickly and carefully as possible. An exhausted fish may be too weak to recover. Do not overplay your fish.
Keep the fish in the water. Minimize or eliminate the time your fish is out of the water. As little as 30 seconds of air exposure can cause delayed mortality of released trout, and in the winter months the fish may be subject to a quick freeze.

Wet your hands when handling the fish. Dry hands can remove the layer of slime that protects the fish from fungi, bacteria, and parasites.

Photograph responsibly. Photo sessions can be stressful for a fish. Prepare for the photo with your fish safely under the water surface, and only lift the fish out of the water for 5 second intervals or less. Try to get the shot (within reason), but return your fish to the water for a rest between attempts.

Be gentle. Keep your fingers away from the gills, don’t squeeze the fish, and never drag a fish onto the bank.

Choose the right landing net. Rubber nets are easier on fish than traditional twine nets.

Safely remove the hook with small pliers or a similar tool. If the hook is deeply embedded or in a sensitive area such as the gills or stomach, cut the leader close to the snout. Make an effort to use regular steel (bronzed) hooks to promote early disintegration. Avoid the use of stainless hooks. One way to release your fish quickly is to use barbless hooks. If barbed hooks are all you have, you can bend the barbs over or simply file them off.

Neutralize the pressure. The air bladders of togue (lake trout) often expand after being pulled up rapidly from deep water. If a togue’s belly appears expanded, release it from the hook first, then gently press your thumb along the stomach near the paired belly fins and move it forward a few times to release the air before releasing the fish.

Revive the fish. Hold the fish underwater in a swimming position until it can swim away (note: do not use this method if surface water temperatures are unusually warm).
Follow these simple basics and most of the fish you put back into the water will be there for you to try to catch next time.

About Fishing

Welcome To About Fishing