Category Archives: Conservation

Alabama Adds to Vast Artificial Reef Zone

Alabama Adds to Vast Artificial Reef Zone
By David Rainer
Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
from The Fishing Wire

Another artificial reef was deployed off the Alabama Gulf Coast this week in Alabama’s vast artificial reef zone. While a reef deployment may not seem like news, this was indeed special because it could change the way industrial and corporate entities view options for recycling materials.

(Billy Pope, aerial courtesy of Alabama Power) A 195-foot barge loaded with two 100-ton boilers from Alabama Power Company plants in Washington and Mobile counties became the latest artificial reef to be deployed off the Alabama Gulf Coast last week about 25 miles south of the Sand Island Lighthouse.
The new reef deployment was the result of a multitude of partners. Alabama Power Company provided a pair of boilers that had been taken out of service from plants in Washington and Mobile counties. Cooper/T. Smith provided a barge and transportation of the reef material. Alabama Wildlife Federation (AWF) and the Alabama Marine Resources Division (MRD) worked as liaisons to start the process and complete the deployment.

“One thing I’m so excited about with this Alabama Power reef project is that it just shows that the more we’re involved with the community, community leaders and business leaders, there are a lot of great things we can do as partners,” said Marine Resources Director Chris Blankenship. “Tim Gothard with the Alabama Wildlife Federation and Matt Bowden with Alabama Power are the ones who reached out to us with this idea. Then it grew with the work with Angus Cooper and Cooper/T. Smith. They had a barge that had neared the end of its useful life, and we needed a barge to transport the material to the deployment site.

“I think there are a lot of opportunities out there to get companies to rethink the ways they’ve always dealt with materials that have reached the end of their service life. The more we get involved with these organizations and companies, the more we can show them there are other opportunities to partner together. It’s good for the companies and good for the marine habitat. That’s why we think it’s important to get the word out about this project, because it can show what we can do with other private companies. I also hope this is a long relationship with Alabama Power as they continue to provide service for their ratepayers and, at the same time, enhance the environment.”

The new reef is located about 25 miles south of the Sand Island Lighthouse in a depth of about 120 feet in the Tatum-Winn North General Permit Area. The boilers are about 18 feet tall and about 40 feet long and weigh about 100 tons each. The barge is 195 feet long.

“A reef this size would take at least a dozen of our super pyramids,” said MRD Artificial Reefs Coordinator Craig Newton. “So this reef is a big cost savings for our artificial reef program. Alabama Power is experiencing cost savings as well because they don’t have to hire skilled personnel to disassemble the boilers and salvage them.”

To prepare for the deployment, Newton said holes were cut in the sides of the boilers to expose an array of small tubes inside the boiler.

“That’s really going to increase the surface area for encrusting organisms to attach to the reef,” Newton said. “It increases the complexity of the reef by providing refuge for small fish, and it’s really going to be easy to find on your bottom machine.

“Within days, the reef will have red snapper on it. Within months, it should have mangrove (gray) snapper on it. Then we’ll start to see the blennies and damselfish and all the little critters that will help support that ecosystem. By the time the season opens again on January 1 (2017), you could see amberjack on the reef because of the vertical relief.”

Blankenship said Cooper/T. Smith’s donation of the barge is a significant enhancement to the reef.

“The barge is part of the reef,” Blankenship said. “The barge and two 100-ton boilers will make a reef that’s going to be there for decades.

“This is the kind of partnership we’re looking for in our reef program. A company like Alabama Power can realize some savings by partnering with us as they upgrade their equipment. That material doesn’t go to the landfill or get cut up for scrap. Instead, we use it for marine habitat. It’s really a win all around. We want to reach out to other companies that might have these same opportunities.”

Angus Cooper III of Cooper/T. Smith said during his time as AWF president, he was able to witness the work Alabama Power is doing to enhance wildlife conservation in the state.

“Alabama Power is truly one of the leaders in our state when it comes to water quality and wildlife conservation,” Cooper said. “We at Cooper/T. Smith are extremely excited to partner with them on this reef project, our first such collaboration. We look forward to seeing the success of this project, both to the ecosystem and in providing a source of outdoor entertainment for our community.”

Wes Anderson, a team leader with Alabama Power’s Environmental Stewardship Projects, said the boilers had reached the end of their useful service, and it was time to either scrap them or find another useful purpose for the material.

“We became aware of other possibilities through our work with Coastal Cleanup and Renew Our Rivers programs on the Alabama Coast,” Anderson said. “Some of our guys said, ‘We sank 60,000 Christmas trees in our freshwater impoundments. Why don’t we make some nice saltwater reefs with some of this salvage equipment?’ When we approached our bosses with the idea, they were very supportive and thought it was a great idea. We were able to show a cost savings for our ratepayers and a great addition to the marine environment.”

Alabama Power Vice President of Environmental Affairs Susan Comensky added, “Being involved in the construction and deployment of this reef is especially exciting for us at Alabama Power because it’s a first for us. In the past, we have simply disposed of old equipment like these boilers, so seeing them repurposed to create a habitat for marine life is very gratifying.”

AWF Executive Director Tim Gothard said the organization’s commitment to Alabama’s artificial reef program made it easy to help foster the partnerships that led to the deployment of the Alabama Power reef.

“We were just glad to be able to connect the dots between all the key players,” Gothard said. “It’s a great public-private partnership for Alabama Power Company to be alerted to a piece of equipment they were retiring and its possible use as an artificial reef. Then Marine Resources was able to evaluate the material to make sure it was suitable for an artificial reef. And, finally, Cooper/T. Smith was able to make transportation available and add a barge to enhance the whole project.

“To me, the exciting part is to see the public and private entities work together with the NGOs (non-governmental organizations) to accomplish a project that will be great for the reef system. It will provide really great opportunities for our citizens and general public who like to fish our offshore reefs.”

The Alabama Power reef was deployed near the 70-foot Offshore Supply Boat Reef to provide additional habitat for species that anglers can target outside of the short red snapper season. MRD officials expect species like vermilion snapper and triggerfish will inhabit the reef as well as amberjack.

“The more diversified we can make the reef program, the more ecologically sound and more stable the reef system will be,” Newton said. “The size of this reef will make it better suited to handle storm events and other stresses that might happen.”

What Is A New Way to Control Fish Populations?

Idaho Fish and Game Develops New Way to Control Fish Populations
Editor’s Note: Today’s feature comes to us courtesy of the Idaho Department of Fish & Game

Technique won a national award for fisheries restoration
Roger Phillips, Public Information Specialist, IDFG
from The Fishing Wire

Hatcheries have long been used to replenish and restore fish populations, but can they also be used to reduce or eradicate them? Idaho Fish and Game researchers are studying whether using traditional hatchery technology in a nontraditional way can eliminate unwanted fish populations in the wild.

Fish and Game researchers and hatchery staff are collaborating on a project using 50 year-old technology to develop a monosex fish population whose offspring can only produce males. These males have two YY chromosomes (YY) rather than the usual XY arrangement.

Stocking YY-male hatchery fish into a body of water with an undesired fish population could change the sex ratio to all males within a few generations, and the unwanted fish population would eventually fail to reproduce and therefore die off. Once accomplished, Fish and Game would stop stocking those fish and fisheries managers would then restock that body of water with a more desirable fish species.

Brook trout were selected for the first YY project because they are short lived and quick to sexually mature, which enables researchers to rapidly produce the hatchery broodstock and test the technique in a natural environment. Brook trout are also good candidates because they are nonnative, frequently overpopulate, and stunt in both lakes and streams, which means fish are too small to be of interest for most anglers.

The YY technique begins in a hatchery, where young brook trout are exposed to low-doses of a common female hormone, estradiol, which has no effect on female fish, but causes male fish to produce eggs when they mature. The egg-producing males are crossed with standard males, which produce about 25 percent YY-male offspring. Those offspring are used to produce another generation that will theoretically produce exclusively male offspring when bred with any other brook trout.

Brook trout produced in the program for stocking in the wild are not exposed to any hormones and appear like all other brook trout, but they carry two male chromosomes instead of one.

While it sounds complex, it’s a fairly simple method of using hormones to affect gender in a segment of the population, then selectively breeding them to get an entire population to produce one gender. It’s routinely done in commercial aquaculture hatcheries to raise identical-looking food-fish, increase growth rates, and control reproduction.

If the program with brook trout proves successful, the “YY male” method could eradicate or limit other undesirable fish species in select waters, perhaps even large bodies of water with carp infestations, or other unwanted fish that limit game fish populations and harm habitat.

Fish and Game has long used fish toxicants to eradicate unwanted fish from entire bodies of water, but toxicants are typically limited to smaller bodies of water, such as ponds, small lakes and reservoirs or small streams.

Netting, trapping, and other fish removal methods also rid waters of unwanted fish, but those efforts are rarely a long-term solution because a few fish usually escape and spawn successfully. All those methods are time consuming, labor intensive, and often have to be repeated years later when unwanted fish populations rebuild.

Fish and Game officials hope the YY-male approach will be a cost-effective technique to control undesirable fish populations. Gary Byrne, the Fish Production Manger overseeing the hatchery portion of Idaho’s YY brook trout program, said it only took four years to develop the YY brook trout broodstock.

Head Fisheries Researcher Dan Schill, who led the team conducting the research project, said they are encouraged by the low cost of broodstock development, and they hope the technique will curb brook trout populations in waters where it’s being tested.

“The proof will be in the pudding over the next few years when our research staff obtain results confirming whether stocked YY fish successfully spawn in the wild and are ultimately effective in reducing the percentage of wild female brook trout in test waters,” Schill said.

Stocking trials of YY Brook Trout in four Idaho streams began in 2014, and the first results are encouraging. A marked YY Male was observed actively spawning in October with a wild female, and testing done on wild fry in study streams in 2015 conclusively showed that some YY males successfully spawned. Of equal note, all progeny of stocked YY fish found were XY males, exactly as predicted and as investigators hoped.

Fish and Game officials presented their findings at the August 2016 American Fisheries Society (AFS) national meeting in Kansas City, which has generated excitement in the fisheries science community. There, the AFS announced Fish and Game’s YY Male Brook Trout Research Program won the 2016 Sport Fish Restoration Outstanding Project award in the category of Research and Surveys.

The awards highlight the importance and effectiveness of the sport fish restoration program and recognize excellence in fisheries management, research and education.

Questions and answers about the YY-male fish program

Q: I understand the basic method of producing YY males in the hatchery, but how does the process of eliminating an undesirable fish population work in an actual stream or lake?

A: In natural fish populations, females have two X sex chromosomes (XX) and males have an X and Y chromosome (XY). When two wild fish spawn, offspring can only inherit one sex chromosome from each parent. Offspring receive an X from the female because that’s all she produces. Half the progeny receive an X from the male side and half receive a Y, which produces a 50:50 sex ratio.

When a hatchery-produced YY male spawns with a wild, XX female, all the progeny inherit one Y from the male and one X from the female and therefore would all be XY males. The basic idea is to continue stocking YY Males into the wild population until all the fish in the water are male, then stocking would end and the population would consequently die off.

Q: Is Fish and Game trying to eradicate all brook trout?

A: No, that’s not the intent of this program. While there is interest in eliminating brook trout in specific waters where they severely impact native species or stunt and become undesirable to anglers, this is primarily an effort to test the basic YY male concept in small, isolated waters. Anglers will continue to find hundreds of streams and mountain lakes in Idaho with wild Brook Trout populations.

Q: Are these brook trout being stocked considered a GMO?

A: No. Because no genes are “spliced” into the target fish genome from another fish species, the YY male fish produced are not genetically modified organisms (or GMO’s), a plus that has been noted by the authors of several recent scientific papers reviewing the YY male approach.

Q: What happens if someone eats a fish that’s been exposed to estradiol.

A: Fish exposed to the hormone in the program remain in enclosed hatchery production silos and are never stocked so it’s virtually impossible for that to occur. However, the doses given to tiny fry are very low and the 100 percent clearance rate from tissues is a matter of days, well over a year before fish become a size of interest to anglers. For these reasons, it is inconceivable that an angler or other animals would be exposed to estradiol, which is a common and frequently used human prescription drug that’s also used in aquaculture.

Q: Could the YY approach lead to eliminating other types of unwanted, non-native, or nuisance fish?

A: Although not the goal of the current program, Fish and Game is always trying to find ways to improve fishing and water quality. Where an undesirable species is limiting fishing opportunity, this is one method that could be attempted if the present experiments on Brook Trout prove successful.

Q: Is it reversible if for some reason you wanted that fish back?

A: Yes. All Fish and Game would have to do is stop stocking YY fish and the population would return to a normal 50:50 sex ratio.

How Do Beavers Engineer Better Fish Habitat?

Oregon beavers engineer better fish habitat, more fish

After four years, scientists recorded a 175 percent increase in juvenile steelhead

Contributed by Michael Milstein
from The Fishing Wire

An ecological experiment that employed beavers to restore streams in Central Oregon found that the streams produced nearly twice as many juvenile steelhead within a few years after the beavers went to work.

While beavers’ natural engineering abilities are well-known, the project on Oregon’s Bridge Creek is the first to show that their reengineering of streams can yield such pronounced improvements in fish populations. The results suggest that, under the right conditions, beavers can restore the health of streams and their fish, faster and likely at lower cost than traditional river restoration that relies on expensive heavy equipment.

“What was most surprising was how fast we saw changes, and how fast the fish responded,” said Chris Jordan, a fisheries ecologist with NOAA Fisheries’ Northwest Fisheries Science Center and coauthor of the research. “Beavers are themselves agents of change and we can see in this case how those changes cascade across the landscape.”

The results of the research on Bridge Creek, a tributary of the John Day River, were published in Nature’s online journal Scientific Reports by a team of scientists from Eco Logical Research Inc., Utah State University, NOAA Fisheries, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and South Fork Research. The research was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration and NOAA Fisheries.

Large numbers of beavers once coexisted with salmon and steelhead across the Northwest until they were trapped nearly to extinction in many areas. Streams such as Bridge Creek also deteriorated under pressure from grazing and other activities. Many streams became incised, cutting trench-like into the ground. The falling water table left streamside vegetation stranded on high terraces, where its roots could no longer access water.

Such streams provide poor fish habitat. Beavers also struggled because a lack of large wood left them to construct dams with small willows easily washed out by high flows.

“We used restoration as a large scale manipulation to a watershed to determine if and how restoration can improve fish habitat,” said Nick Bouwes, owner of Utah-based Eco Logical Research Inc. and lead author of the study. “We also used a very cheap approach which mainly relied on beavers doing most of the heavy lifting for us.”

In 2009 scientists tested what would happen if beavers got a foothold. The scientists jump-started the beavers’ work by sinking posts (called beaver-dam analogs, or BDAs) into the streambed of Bridge Creek to help the animals build and anchor their dams against the current. In addition, the Bureau of Land Management reduced grazing in wetland areas along the creek, and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife closed the watershed to beaver trapping.

Quickly, beavers began building dams using the BDAs throughout Bridge Creek. By 2013 beavers had built 171 dams with help from the BDAs or naturally, eight times more dams than the average of the few years before scientists installed the BDAs.

But the real change was in the stream. Beaver dams anchored to the BDAs raised the water level, creating large pools where sediment was deposited. Soon the trenches began filling in, and water spread out onto the adjacent floodplain, giving rise to streamside vegetation and creating side channels and backwaters. Water temperatures slightly cooled in stretches with beaver dams compared to those without.

“We went from a place where the beavers couldn’t even manage to build dams, to a place where the beavers control the landscape,” Jordan said. “We got it started, but the beavers did the work.”

The changes improved fish habitat, with a deeper more complex stream channel. Over seven years the scientists tagged 35,867 fish with tiny electronic tags to track their movements and survival.

They found that beaver ponds held more juvenile steelhead than adjacent upstream areas. Plus, the ponds created more wetland habitat. Overall in Bridge Creek fish density increased and juvenile steelhead survival jumped 52 percent compared to a control watershed where scientists had not installed BDAs. Only four years after scientists first installed the first BDAs in Bridge Creek, they recorded a 175 percent increase in juvenile steelhead production compared to the control watershed.

While the quality of habitat improved, the quantity of habitat also increased as stream channels and wetlands expanded into the floodplain, Jordan said.

“It’s hard to point to any one thing as the most important change,” Jordan said. “It’s all of the changes that makes better quality habitat, and makes more habitat too.”

“Because of the large scale nature of the experiment and the intense monitoring, this study represents one of the few examples of detecting benefits of restoration to a fish population- and perhaps the first to show beavers as the restoration agent to cause such a response,” Bouwes said.

More ambitious efforts to use beavers as agents of restoration are now underway in other parts of the Columbia Basin. An interagency team of scientists has also developed the Beaver Restoration Guidebook to assist landowners and others interested in recruiting beavers as natural engineers.

Additional Information:
NWFSC: Working with beaver to restore salmon habitat

Why Is There A Complete Closure of Yellowstone River?

Montana Imposes Complete Closure of Yellowstone River Due to Fish Disease
from The Fishing Wire

An unprecedented fish kill has brought complete closure of miles of one of America’s greatest cold water fisheries.

(Bozeman, Mont.)—Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks is implementing an immediate closure of all water-based recreation (fishing, wading, floating, tubing, boating, etc.) on the Yellowstone River and its tributaries from Yellowstone National Park’s northern boundary at Gardiner to the Highway 212 bridge in Laurel. This significant action on the part of the Department is in response to the ongoing and unprecedented fish kill on the Yellowstone. This action is necessary to protect the fishery and the economy it sustains. The closure will also help limit the spread of the parasite to adjacent rivers through boats, tubes, waders and other human contact and minimize further mortality in all fish species.

In the past week, FWP has documented over 2,000 dead Mountain Whitefish on some affected stretches of the Yellowstone. With that, FWP estimates the total impact to Mountain Whitefish in the Yellowstone to be in the tens of thousands. FWP has also recently received reports of the kill beginning to affect some Rainbow and Yellowstone Cutthroat Trout.

Test results from samples sent to the U.S. and Wildlife Service Fish Health Center in Bozeman show the catalyst for this fish kill to be Proliferative Kidney Disease – one of the most serious diseases to impact whitefish and trout. The disease, caused by a microscopic parasite, is known to occur in Canada, the U.S. and Europe. It has been documented previously in only two isolated locations in Montana over the past 20 years. Recent outbreaks have occurred in Washington, Oregon and Idaho. In trout, research has shown this disease to have the potential to cause 20 to 100 percent mortality. The parasite does not pose a risk to humans.

The effect of the disease on Yellowstone’s fish populations is exacerbated by other stressors like near record low flows, consistent high temperatures, and the disturbance caused by recreational activities.

FWP Director Jeff Hagener says in coming to the decision, the Department had to weigh the totality of the circumstances and risk to the fishery.

“We recognize that this decision will have a significant impact on many people. However, we must act to protect this public resource for present and future generations,” said Hagener.

“A threat to the health of Montana’s fish populations is a threat to Montana’s entire outdoor economy and the tens of thousands of jobs it sustains,” said Gov. Steve Bullock, noting that Montana’s outdoor recreation economy is responsible for more than 64,000 Montana jobs and nearly $6 billion in yearly economic activity. “We must be guided by science. Our state cannot afford this infectious disease to spread to other streams and rivers and it’s my responsibility to do everything we can to stop this threat in its tracks and protect Montana jobs and livelihoods.”

FWP will continue to monitor the river and will lift the closure when stream conditions such as flow and temperature improve and fish mortality ceases.

In addition to the closure on the Yellowstone, FWP is asking for the public’s assistance in preventing the spread of this parasite by properly cleaning (CLEAN.DRAIN.DRY) all equipment prior to moving between waterbodies (i.e., boats, waders, trailers). FWP has also set up two Aquatic Invasive Species decontamination stations set up along I-90 near the affected area in an effort to help reduce the chance of this parasite moving to other rivers.

How Can I Keep Bass Alive in Summer?

Tips to Keep Bass Alive in Summer
from The Fishing Wire

Largemouth bass anglers who practice catch-and-release fishing this summer can follow a few simple steps to ensure the fish they catch today will survive to bite another lure tomorrow.

Summertime heat brings with it higher temperatures and lower dissolved oxygen levels in reservoirs and rivers — conditions that are tough on largemouth bass, which can become more stressed when caught.

To minimize stress on fish, an angler who plans to catch and release the fish should land the fish quickly and handle it as little as possible.

“Try not to remove the fish from the water, even when you’re removing the hook from the fish’s mouth,” said Christian Waters, Inland Fisheries Division chief for the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission. “Handle the fish as little as possible to help reduce the loss of slime coat, which is the fish’s main defense against infection and disease.”

Waters offers anglers other tips to keep a largemouth bass alive:

Wet your hands before you touch a fish;
Return the fish quickly to the water if you do not plan to keep it or place it in a livewell; and,
Use a knotless nylon or rubber-coated net instead of a knotted nylon net.

Anglers participating in fishing tournaments can minimize fish mortality by maintaining healthy oxygen and water quality in their livewells. A few ways to do this are:

Knowing the capacity of the livewell and not exceeding a ratio of more than 1 pound of bass per gallon of water;
Running a recirculating pump continuously if more than 5 pounds of bass are in the livewell;
Using aerators or oxygen-injection systems to keep the water’s oxygen level above 5 parts per million (ppm); and
Keeping livewell water about 5 degrees below the reservoir or river temperature by adding block ice.

Waters also recommends that tournament participants fill their weigh-in bags with livewell water, not reservoir or river water, before putting in their catch. They should put only five fish in a bag, fewer if the fish exceed 4 pounds each. Finally, they should limit the amount of time that fish are held in bags to less than 2 minutes.

Fishing tournament organizers can do their part to help keep fish alive by adopting best handling practices at all events. These include staggering weigh-in times to reduce the time fish are held in weigh-in bags, arranging for release boats to return bass quickly to the water and equipping recovery stations with oxygen and recirculating water. Organizers also can provide holding tanks during the weigh-in with water 5 degrees below the reservoir or river temperature and with oxygen levels above 5 ppm. They also can reduce the number of competitive fishing hours.

An alternative to the traditional weigh-in tournament is to conduct a “paper tournament,” which doesn’t require a weigh-in. “This is an especially helpful strategy during periods of extreme heat,” Waters added.

More information on keeping bass alive, including the B.A.S.S.-produced publication, “Keeping Bass Alive: A Guidebook for Tournament Bass Anglers and Organizers,” is available on the Commission’s website, www.ncwildlife.org/fishing. The Commission has produced a “Keeping Bass Alive” card, suitable for downloading and printing that provides tips for both recreational and tournament anglers.

Jodie B. Owen
919-707-0187
jodie.owen@ncwildlife.org

What Are Invasive Carp

Know the difference: Invasive Carversus Common Carp

Michigan DNR Staff
from The Fishing Wire

There’s a lot of talk around the Great Lakes these days about carp, especially invasive or Asian carp. What about common carp, those monsters of Michigan waters anglers love to battle with fly rods? Are these fish one and the same and what’s the big deal about carp anyway?

The issue can be confusing.

To better understand the important differences, it’s best to start with a definition of what an “invasive” species is.

“Invasive species are those species which are not native to a particular area – in this case Michigan – and whose introduction causes harm or would be likely to cause harm to the state’s economy, human health or environment,” said Joanne Foreman, communications coordinator for the Michigan Invasive Species Program.

Just because a species is not native does not make it invasive.

“Whether fruits, vegetables, livestock or field crops, most non-native species are not harmful and many provide benefits to Michigan, from boosting the economy to beautifying landscapes,” said Nick Popoff, head of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources’ Aquatic Species and Regulatory Affairs Unit. “When it comes to fish, some non-native species beneficial to Michigan through sportfishing enjoyment have included coho and Chinook salmon and brown and rainbow trout.”

Invasive species are those particular non-natives that pose potential harm.

As the name “invasive” suggests, these species can out-compete native species by reproducing and spreading quickly in areas where they have no natural predators, thereby changing the balance of the ecosystems Michigan relies on for recreation, commerce, food and jobs.

Means of introduction

From the emerald ash borer and sea lamprey to rusty crayfish and Eurasian watermilfoil, numerous invasive species have found their way to Michigan, often by interesting means.

Some traveled here in the ballast water of ships. Others escaped from pet stores or were household pets let go into the wild where they adapted to local conditions. Still others hitched rides on planes, trains and automobiles.

In the case of all carp species, they intentionally were introduced to North America.

Common carp

Common carp were brought to the United States during the late 1800s as an esteemed food of European and Asian markets. Native to Eurasia, common carp are found today in the Great Lakes, large inland lakes and reservoirs, small and large rivers, swamps, canals and drains. Many frequent places where water quality is less than ideal.

An increasing number of sport anglers enjoy battling these fish and some charter operators now offer carp excursions.

Common carp average 15 to 32 inches and 4 to 31 pounds. They have triangular heads, blunt snouts and small barbels (fleshy, whisker-like filaments) at the corners of their mouths.

Because they have been widely distributed and their demand as a food source has diminished, common carp sometimes are referred to as a nuisance species. However, they are not considered invasive in Michigan.

Invasive carp

There are four carp species that are described as invasive – bighead, silver, grass and black.

In the 1970s, invasive carp were brought to the U.S. from Asia, primarily to eat algae in the ponds of aquaculture operations located in the South. During flooding events, these fish escaped into the Mississippi and Illinois rivers and have been migrating north toward Lake Michigan.

Because the invasive carp problem is a binational and multistate issue, U.S. federal and state governments are working together with Canada on a resolution.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in a partnership with state and federal agencies, has erected electric barriers in the Chicago Area Waterway System and a berm in Indiana to try to keep the carp from reaching the Great Lakes.

The Michigan DNR is among the leading agencies advocating for additional efforts to stop the spread of these fish.

The watch list

Michigan maintains a “watch list” for invasive species. Species on the watch list have never been confirmed in the wild in the state or have very limited distribution. If they are encountered, they should be reported as soon as possible.Silver carp, one species of invasive carp, are pictured leaping out of the water after being disturbed by a passing boat.

“Early detection and timely reporting of these species are crucial for increasing the chances of preventing establishment and limiting potential ecological, social and economic impacts,” Foreman said.

Bighead, silver, grass and black carp are on the watch list. They also are “prohibited” invasive species in Michigan.

Prohibited and restricted species

Some invasive species are legally designated by the state of Michigan as either “prohibited” or “restricted,” making them unlawful to possess, introduce, import, sell or offer for sale as live organisms, except under certain circumstances.

• The term “prohibited” is used for invasive species that are not widely distributed in the state. Often, management or control techniques for prohibited species are not available.

• The term “restricted” is applied to invasive species that are established in the state. Management and control practices usually are available for restricted species.

Michigan’s Natural Resources Environmental Protection Act (Part 413 of Act 451) established the list of prohibited and restricted species, which is regularly amended by Invasive Species Orders.

Bighead and silver carp

Of the four invasive carp species on the watch list, bighead and silver carp pose the most concern.

“Bighead and silver carp are spreading to lakes, rivers and streams in the Mississippi River and Great Lakes region. They have been moving steadily north, but are not yet established in the Great Lakes,” said Seth Herbst, a fisheries A bighead carp, bottom, and a silver carp are pictured. These two invasive carp species are of the biggest concern.biologist and the DNR Fisheries Division’s aquatic invasive species coordinator. “These two species like large lakes and connecting rivers, and if introduced would have the ability to adapt to Michigan’s cold winters.”

Biologists expect that if these invasive carp make it to Michigan waters, the fish will disrupt the food chain that supports native fish of the Great Lakes, such as walleye, yellow perch and lake whitefish – which could diminish fishing opportunities for sport and commercial anglers.

“Due to their large size and rapid rate of reproduction, bighead and silver carp pose a significant threat to the ecosystem of the Great Lakes Basin,” said Tammy Newcomb, DNR senior water policy advisor and fisheries research biologist. “Silver carp leap high out of the water when disturbed by watercraft. Boaters can be and have been injured by these leaping fish. Fear of injury could diminish the desire for recreational boating activities in areas inhabited by these fish.”

Bighead and silver carp have eyes situated below their toothless mouths. Silver carp may grow to longer than 3 feet and weigh up to 60 pounds, while bighead carp are even larger – up to 5 feet long, weighing up to 90 pounds.

Adult bighead carp are dark gray, with dark blotches. As the name implies, silver carp are silver colored with white bellies.

Black carp

Black carp are the largest of the four invasive carp species, able to grow to over 6 feet long and weigh more than 150 pounds.

Black carp are the largest of the four invasive carp species. They can be over 6 feet long and weigh more than 150 pounds. These fish have blackish-brown-bluish scales and an almost white belly.

So far, bighead, silver and black carp have not been found in Michigan waters. There is no evidence that these three carp species have colonized or are present in any numbers in the Great Lakes.

Grass carp

“Grass carp have been detected in low numbers in all the Great Lakes, except Lake Superior, since the early 1980s (Lake Erie in particular) and have historically been introduced into waterways for aquatic nuisance vegetation control in some Great Lakes states,” Popoff said.

Grass carp can grow to more than 5 feet long and weigh more than 80 pounds. They have eyes that sit in line with their mouths, or slightly above, and scales that look to be crosshatched.

“In the mid-1980s, a grass carp sterilization program was put in place to reduce the risk of introduced fish reproducing and reaching nuisance levels that would result in detrimental impacts,” Herbst said. “The sterilization program has worked to some extent, but fertile fish are still being captured in locations where only sterile fish introduction is authorized.”

Despite the reduced threat of grass carp, Michigan is still taking a proactive approach with regulations, enforcement, and using a scientific approach to increase the effectiveness of control efforts.

Knowing the difference between common and invasive carp is not as difficult as it might seem at first, once you know the facts.

“Educating ourselves and others on these species can go a long way in the fight against the proliferation of these non-native, invasive species of carp – fish that have the potential to dramatically damage or destroy Great Lakes ecosystems, causing untold losses to Michigan’s economy and world-class natural resources,” Foreman said.

Watch Michigan DNR staff training to catch invasive carp in Illinois.

Report invasive (Asian) carp and get more information on invasive species. Find out more about the history of common carp in North America.

What Is the Tarpon Acoustic Tagging Project?

BTT Tarpon Acoustic Tagging Project
from The Fishing Wire

BTT is pleased to announce that our new tarpon acoustic tagging project is beginning shortly. The purpose of this study is to obtain scientific data necessary for tarpon conservation that will be used exclusively to protect tarpon and enhance their habitat through improvements in fishery management. BTT will not distribute specific data to the public and will only describe tarpon movements and habitats in a general way in order to build public support for greater protections. This project will help answer the following questions:

Is the tarpon population large and robust or small and vulnerable? If anglers in a particular location are fishing for the same fish every year, then the tarpon population is probably smaller than we think, and issues like shark predation will become a bigger concern. If fish move among regions every year, and anglers are fishing for different fish each year, the tarpon population is probably large.
Do tarpon use the same spawning site each year or move among spawning sites? On average, ocean currents will carry the larvae from a spawning site to juvenile habitats in a specific geographic region. If it’s the same adults at the spawning site every year, then local adult losses will cause declines in juveniles. If tarpon move among spawning sites, then the population will be more resilient.
How do changes in freshwater flows into coastal waters influence tarpon movements? Do the problems with Lake Okeechobee and Everglades restoration impact tarpon? Are the water issues in Apalachicola causing changes in tarpon movements?
What are the movement patterns and habitat use of mid-size tarpon (20-50 pounds)? How will these tarpon be impacted by coastal water quality issues? This size class, which is the future of the fishery, is very vulnerable to changes in coastal habitats and water quality.

Why Acoustic Tracking?

Although satellite tagging previously funded by BTT provided valuable data, the tags typically only stayed on the tarpon for a few months at a time, which prevented long-term tracking. In addition, because of the large size of the satellite tags, their use is limited to tarpon over 80 pounds.

The new Tarpon Program will use acoustic telemetry to track tarpon movements.

acoustic tags come in many sizes
Advantages of acoustic tags are that they are smaller and less invasive and can remain with the fish and active for up to five years rather than a few months. In addition, because acoustic tags come in a range of sizes, they can be used on tarpon from 20 pounds and larger, not just the extra-large adults. They also cost significantly less than satellite tags.

How Acoustic Tagging Works

Tags are surgically implanted in the abdomen. Each tag emits an ultrasonic ping that has a unique code for each tag. These pings are detected by underwater receivers when a tagged fish swims in range. When receivers are placed at strategic locations like inlets, bridges, and schooling locations, they can be very efficient.

As part of this four-year study, BTT will place 20 new receivers in waters around Florida, to add to the 60 receivers we already have in the water. In addition, colleagues at universities and state and federal agencies are using this technology to study movements of other fish species. Their receivers will also detect BTT tarpon tags. With more than 1,300 receivers in the water in the Gulf of Mexico, and more than 3,000 along the southeastern US coast, this project will be able to examine both local and long-distance movements for many years. BTT will tag 50 fish in each year of the study.

How You Can Help

Sponsor a Tarpon: Sponsor an acoustic tag for $2,500. You can name your tarpon, and will receive a certificate with its name, photo and initial capture info (very general location and measurements). Each time BTT downloads data from the receivers (approximately every 6 months), a summary of the general data on your fish will be sent to you.

Sponsor a Receiver: Sponsor and name an acoustic receiver (listening station) for $3,000. Each time BTT downloads data from your listening station, you will receive a summary of the fish that have been detected by that station.

Help us tag tarpon. Prior to a tagging trip, our scientists will put out a notice about when and where they will be, along with contact information. If you are fishing in that area when we are tagging, all you need to do is call us when you catch a tarpon. We’ll come to your boat, transfer the tarpon over, and take care of the rest. Remember to always keep the tarpon in the water!

Contact Us Today!

For more information and to sponsor a tag or receiver, please contact Alex Woodsum, Director of Development and Communications at 617-872-4807 or alex@bonefishtarpontrust.org

The purpose of this study is to obtain data necessary for conservation. Data from this study will only be shared with the public in a very general sense to explain how the data is contributing to conservation. Specific data on tarpon movements, habitat use, etc. will not be shared. Our goal is to use these data for conservation, not to help anglers catch more tarpon. So rest assured, the data is highly confidential.

Why Guntersville Drops out of Listing of America’s Top Bass Lakes

Guntersville Drops out of Listing of America’s Top Bass Lakes

By Frank Sargeant
from The Fishing Wire

After once sitting atop the heap, this year Alabama’s Lake Guntersville did not make the top 10 in the annual listing compiled by Bassmaster Magazine of the nation’s top bass fishing spots. Toledo Bend Lake in Texas topped the charts this year, for the second year in a row.

In fact, Guntersville did not even top the southeast division, where it came in 5th. Santee Cooper in South Carolina was listed as the tops in the southeast.

North Alabama’s Lake Guntersville is still producing some whopper fish these days, but state studies indicate low numbers of fish in the 15 to 18 inch class, producing slow fishing for most anglers at present, and also indicating that fewer big fish will be caught in future as the current crop of lunkers ages out of the population. (Mike Carter photo)
And G’ville was only the third best lake in the TVA chain. Both Chickamauga, upriver, and Kentucky Lake, downriver, were placed above the 70,000 acre North Alabama lake.

What’s happened to the big lake–the economic driver of much of the economy in Jackson and Marshall counties?

Nothing unusual, according to biologists with Auburn University and with the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR).

“We’re seeing a natural downturn at Guntersville, the result of what we call recruitment, or the success of spawning, in past years,” says Matt Catalano, assistant professor of Fishery Science at Auburn.

“The lake had an outstanding year class in 2008 when a huge number of the fish that were hatched survived to eventually become adults, and by 2011, anglers were seeing the results of this year class in their catches–there were more 15 to 18 inch fish than ADCNR had ever recorded in a continuing study of over 20 years at the lake,” said Catalano.

“But as fish get older, there’s a natural mortality as well as some fishing mortality, and not only that the larger fish are harder to catch–they’re more wary because they’ve been caught and released, and they’re not in the same places that the smaller fish are most of the time.”

Catalano said that continuing studies indicate that there are now more fish over 20 inches than there have been at any time during the study years, but that the more numerous 15 to 18 inch fish have fallen off to an average figure that’s 30 to 40 percent below the numbers in the 2011 peak.

“We don’t measure angler success, but with that many fewer fish in the mid-ranges, it’s sure to have an impact on the fisherman’s success,” said Catalano.

What brought on the big year class in 2008–and can the lake be manipulated to make it happen again?

“There seems to be correlation between years with low water flow from the spawn on into June and having a high survival rate of the fry,” says Catalano. Low flow typically results in clearer and shallower water, which results in more aquatic weed growth, and in return this builds a strong food chain as well as providing lots of cover where young fish can hide from predators.

Since Guntersville is part of the TVA chain, controlling the water levels to benefit the fish is probably not an option. The lake levels are manipulated to maintain navigation for commercial traffic, and for flood control; fish and fishermen have to deal with what Mother Nature give us.

However, Catalano said there’s some evidence that past stocking of Florida strain bass has helped improve the overall genetics in some areas of Guntersville, and heavy stocking could have a good result in a year when the natural spawn is down.

“Stocking a lot of young fish on top of a healthy native population usually doesn’t have much of an impact because the habitat is already full,” says Catalano. “But we know that stocking Florida bass has had very good results in other lakes around the country–in the right place at the right time, and with the right volume, it could improve the fishing.”

Changing the rules for anglers to reduce bass harvest, on the other hand, does not seem likely to produce much result.

“We tag a lot of bass on this lake and the number of returns we get give us some idea of what the harvest is relative to the number of fish. It’s pretty minimal–we think natural mortality is a far larger factor here,” he said. “That means tighter harvest rules probably would not have a measurable impact.”

The Lake Guntersville Conservation Group, formed to try bringing the fishery back through stocking and other efforts, has slated its next meeting for July 31 at Goose Pond Bait & Tackle, on the water just south of Scottsboro, at 3 p.m. Those who would like to join the group can contact Sharon Carter at 256 218 0613.

Glowing Crappie?

Glowing crappie may help Arkansas GFC evaluate stocking success

PINE BLUFF – Black lights and phosphorescent fish – throw in your standard mod Peter Max poster, some Hendrix on the turntable and maybe a lava lamp, and it would seem like someone’s living room circa 1970. However, more than four decades later, black lights are less a living room showpiece and more useful in the hands of biologists looking for “glowing” crappie to determine how effective a pond-stocking program can be.

As part of a grant administered by the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, Greyson Farris, a master’s student in the aquaculture program at the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff, is studying the AGFC’s crappie stocking program using fingerlings from two hatcheries: the Joe Hogan hatchery at Lonoke and the William H. Donham hatchery in Corning. Late in the fall of the past two years, about 180,000 fingerlings – half of them white crappie from Lonoke and the other half black crappie from Corning – were treated with chemicals that allow researchers to track the fish after stocking in eight Arkansas lakes, according to JJ Gladden, a biologist at the Lonoke facility.

During the first year, the fish were marked with the U.S. Department of Agriculture-approved oxytetracycline, or OTC, in which the fingerlings absorb in a six-hour bath. The chemical is absorbed in bony areas such as the ear bone. Last fall, the fish were also treated with OTC, but Farris then used another marking agent, calcein, a phosphorescent dye, in another, shorter treatment before the fingerlings were taken for stocking.

The key difference between using calcein over OTC is that fish tested for the presence of the marker do not have to be sacrificed in the process.

“As far as I know, nobody has ever done the calcein marking with crappie,” Farris said. “They’ve done it with largemouth bass, perch, walleye.”

Fish captured for testing that were marked with only OTC have to be cut open for their ear bone, or otolith, to be examined under special light. The nature of calcein, Farris says, is that it’s absorbed not only in the bones but in the fins, around the eyes and mouths, and it offers a vivid green appearance when seen under black light and with specific glasses. Using the calcein as a marker required the AGFC to request a special license from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, but the process for marking the fish was far easier, Farris said. Instead of a six-hour soak in OTC, the fingerlings were hit with a 30-second bath of salinized water (about 40 parts per 1,000, he said), a fresh water rinse, then a seven-minute soak in the calcein-water mixture. The salt water bath drew out most of the water from the fingerlings – making them “sponge-like,” Farris said – which then soaked up the calcein.

OTC is a proven method in marking fish, in use for more than 40 years, Farris said. The question is, how long will the calcein last in a crappie? Farris said calcein in fish has been shown to degrade over time in sunlight. However, crappie tend to stay deeper in lakes and the fish’s nature is to not turn on its side; the underbelly of the crappie should be least likely to see much if any photodegradation, Farris said. And in fish he’s tested both at UAPB and in pond nettings, he’s found calcein.

All this is to show how effective a stocking program can be for a lake such as Lake Saracen in Pine Bluff, one of the eight lakes in Farris’ study. Other lakes in the study are Lake Des Arc, Lake Charles, Lake Poinsett, Calion Lake, Irons Fork Reservoir, Sugarloaf Lake and Beaverfork Lake. So far, he has found growing crappie that were AGFC-stocked in six of the lakes. “It’s great to see how many fish are surviving on a month-to-month scale,” Farris said. “Most of the time when you stock ponds or lakes, you don’t know if you’re having a benefit to the Commission unless you have a creel survey or stocked fish come up into your nets. You have to kill the OTC fish, and that’s not beneficial in the long term. Also, every OTC-marked fish will take 15 minutes of lab time, at least, to check. You can tell immediately if you have a calcein-marked fish. Fisheries biologists are better off in the long run, getting it cheaper, faster and easier.”

Calcein marking costs more, about $5,000 to mark 90,000 fish compared to $1,000 for OTC. But the tested fish live. And, “any measure of a stocking program is a measure of success,” Farris notes.

Because of warmer autumns the past two years, the fingerlings weren’t ready for the treatment and stocking until November. Farris tested the lakes through the winter and said he will resume through the summer and fall, netting about 250 crappie per lake to find if they were part of the stockings.

“The objective was to find a way to look at these fish without having to kill them, stock them, see them in the nets with [black lights] and see if they were the fish we stocked,” Farris said.

Leading Conservationists to Shape Immersive Conservation Attraction

Johnny Morris Convenes Leading Conservationists to Shape Immersive Conservation Attraction

Noted conservationist and Bass Pro shops founder Johnny Morris addresses conservation
Springfield, Mo. – More than 25 of the country’s leading conservation organizations are contributing to the creation of one of the largest, most immersive conservation attractions in the world. Scheduled to open in Springfield, Missouri in 2016, Wonders of Wildlife National Museum and Aquarium will celebrate the critical role responsible hunting and fishing play in conserving the great outdoors.

A vision of leading conservationist and Bass Pro Shops founder/CEO Johnny Morris, the 315,000-square-foot experience is intended to inspire future generations to enjoy, love and conserve the great outdoors. To help shape the attraction’s educational message and story, Morris convened a “who’s who” of conservation leaders in America. With expertise ranging from wetlands and waterfowl to coastal waters and international wildlife efforts, leading national conservation groups are collaborating to help tell the untold stories of the conservation movement in the United States and showcasing their worldwide impact.

Consisting of leaders from both nonprofit and government entities, the nationwide collaboration hopes to establish a new conservation capital that highlights past successes and shares important conservation messages with a national audience.

“This will be one of the foremost conservation attractions in the world,” said Dan Ashe, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “There is a significant opportunity to reach millions of visitors about the importance of conserving, protecting and enhancing wildlife habitats.”

Convening Inspired by Historic Summit

Participants of the first North American Wildlife Conference in 1936
Morris first convened the leaders at a National Conservation Summit held in Springfield in late 2015. The gathering brought together more than 40 national conservation leaders to discuss fun and engaging ways to inspire the public to appreciate and protect wildlife and natural habitats.

The Summit was inspired by and paid homage to the nation’s first North American Wildlife Conference held in Washington D.C. in 1936. The original gathering, convened by Ding Darling, founder of The National Wildlife Federation, and President Theodore Roosevelt, brought together more than 2,000 hunters, anglers and conservationists from across the country to discuss conservation issues.

The original conference helped unify the nation’s conservation voices and shaped a national platform to advocate on behalf of the outdoors. Instilling the spirit of that gathering, Morris’ modern summit served as a forum to collectively discuss opportunities to educate and engage today’s public in conservation efforts centered at the new museum and aquarium. The group also shared thoughts on impactful educational programming for visitors of all ages, particularly children and families.

National Leaders Contributing to World-Class Attraction

National conservation leaders convene in Springfield, Missouri
Primarily funded and operated by the nonprofit Johnny Morris Foundation, Wonders of Wildlife consists of an all-new 1.3-million-gallon aquarium adventure showcasing 35,000 live fish, mammals, reptiles and birds and an immersive wildlife museum that highlights diverse habitats and wildlife from around the world.

Each of the 25 participating partner organizations is represented throughout the experience in a variety of ways. The groups are contributing historical photos, videos, multimedia content and artifacts to provide a widespread and engaging look into wildlife conservation practices. Experts from the groups are also assisting with the museum’s interpretive messaging and sharing their conservation success stories.

For example, the museum will become the new permanent home for The Boone and Crockett Club’s world-famous National Collection of Heads and Horns. The exhibit gives visitors a chance to see more than 40 historically significant North American game animals that helped spark America’s conservation movement when it debuted at New York’s Bronx Zoo in 1922. Additionally, The International Game Fish Association’s interactive Fishing Hall of Fame is relocating to the aquarium from the IGFA’s headquarters in Florida. The exhibit tells the stories of some of the sport’s most accomplished men and women.

Nearby, The National Archery Hall of Fame seeks to preserve the sport’s history and tradition with more than 1,500 artifacts including a handmade bow made by the Native American Apache leader Geronimo. By honoring the outstanding men and women in the sport, the experience sends a message that anyone can enjoy archery as a gateway to appreciating the outdoors. The NRA National Sporting Arms Museum showcases the development and evolution of hunting arms in America from colonial times to today. This educational gallery is one of the premier sporting arms museums in the world. Home to nearly one thousand artifacts the gallery tells the story of American icons such as Lewis and Clark and Theodore Roosevelt.

The result of these collaborations is a bold new attraction that leaves visitors with a powerful conservation message.

“We are honored to have the support and input from America’s leading conservation voices as we establish one of the most comprehensive conservation attractions in the world,” said Johnny Morris. “By highlighting the important roles these organizations play in conserving wildlife and sharing their accomplishments with our visitors, we hope to raise awareness of their work and recruit new members to engage in ongoing conservation efforts.”

America’s Conservation Capital

One of the aquarium’s immersive exhibits simulates an artificially created reef to underscore the importance of healthy habitats for fish and wildlife
Wonders of Wildlife is envisioned to be unlike anything else in the world. Inside the immersive aquarium adventure, visitors will encounter sharks, rays, jellyfish, eel, otters, turtles, sport fish and countless game fish such as largemouth bass and catfish as they travel through an elaborate trail system of distinct aquatic habitats, discovering hands-on activities that celebrate the diversity of all aquatic life, including incredible sport fish. The entire aquarium experience highlights the need to conserve these beautiful ecosystems and the animals that live there.

Completely immersive wildlife galleries transport visitors to the wildest places on earth through meticulously recreated 4D dioramas that include the realistic sights, sounds and smells of awe-inspiring habitats from North America, Africa and the Arctic.

The experience will celebrate the vital contributions of sportsmen and women to wildlife conservation and engages leading conservation partners to showcase important success stories and ongoing efforts.

The new experience is located adjacent to Bass Pro Shops’ iconic flagship store in Springfield, Missouri’s number one tourist destination that already welcomes four million visitors per year and further establishes Johnny Morris’ vision of creating America’s Conservation Capital and a new must-see destination for everyone who loves the outdoors.

Participating conservation and wildlife management organizations include:
Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies – Ron Regan, Executive Director
Boone and Crockett Club – Tony Schoonen, Chief of Staff
Center for Coastal Conservation – Jeff Angers, President
Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation – Gary Kania, Vice President
Dallas Safari Club – Ben Carter, Executive Director
Ducks Unlimited – Dale Hall, President
International Game Fish Association – Rob Kramer, President
James River Basin Partnership – Joe Pitts, Executive Director
Missouri Department of Conservation – Bob Ziehmer, Director
Missouri Department of Natural Resources – Sara Parker-Pauley, Director
National Geographic – Crista Gibbons, Senior Director, Global Corporate Partnerships
Native American Fish and Wildlife Society – Fred Matt, Executive Director
National Audubon Society – Glenn Olson, Donal O’Brien Chair in Bird Conservation through Advocacy & Public Policy
National Rifle Association – Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President & CEO
National Wild Turkey Federation – George Thornton, CEO
Ozark Water Watch – David Casaletto, President & Executive Director
Quality Deer Management Association – Brian Murphy, CEO
Southwest Tribal Fisheries Commission – Stuart Leon, Executive Director
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership – Whit Fosburgh, President & CEO
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – Dan Ashe, Director
Watershed Committee of the Ozarks – Mike Kromrey, Executive Director
Wildlife Management Institute – Steve Williams, President & CEO
Wild Sheep Foundation – Buddy DuVall, Executive VP Development

About Wonders of Wildlife National Museum and Aquarium
Scheduled to open in 2016, the all-new Wonders of Wildlife National Museum and Aquarium will be one of the largest, most immersive conservation attractions in the world. Primarily funded and operated by the nonprofit Johnny Morris Foundation, Wonders of Wildlife consists of an all-new 1.3-million-gallon aquarium adventure showcasing 35,000 live fish, mammals, reptiles and birds, and an immersive wildlife museum that brings visitors eye-to-eye with the greatest collection of record-setting game animals ever assembled. The 315,000-square foot experience celebrates the critical role responsible hunting and fishing plays in wildlife conservation and inspires visitors to enjoy, love and conserve the great outdoors. Located on the campus of Bass Pro Shops’ iconic flagship store in Springfield, Missouri, Wonders of Wildlife further establishes the site as America’s Conservation Capital. For more information visit www.wondersofwildlife.org.