Identifying monitoring information needs that support the management of fish in large rivers.
Timothy D Counihan, Kristen L Bouska, Shannon K Brewer, Robert B Jacobson, Andrew F Casper, Colin G Chapman, Ian R Waite, Kenneth R Sheehan, Mark Pyron, Elise R Irwin, Karen Riva-Murray, Alexa J McKerrow, Jennifer M Bayer
Author Information
Timothy D Counihan: U.S. Geological Survey, Western Fisheries Research Center, Columbia River Research Laboratory, Cook, Washington, United States of America. ORCID
Kristen L Bouska: U.S. Geological Survey, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, La Crosse, Wisconsin, United States of America.
Shannon K Brewer: U.S. Geological Survey, Alabama Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Auburn, Alabama, United States of America.
Robert B Jacobson: U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia Environmental Research Center, Columbia, Missouri, United States of America.
Andrew F Casper: Illinois Natural History Survey, Illinois River Biological Station, Havana, Illinois, United States of America.
Colin G Chapman: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Ocean Salmon and Columbia River Program, Clackamas, Oregon, United States of America.
Ian R Waite: U.S. Geological Survey, Oregon Water Science Center, Portland, Oregon, United States of America.
Kenneth R Sheehan: U.S. Geological Survey, Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center, Flagstaff, Arizona, United States of America.
Mark Pyron: Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, United States of America.
Elise R Irwin: U.S. Geological Survey, Alabama Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Auburn, Alabama, United States of America.
Karen Riva-Murray: U.S. Geological Survey, Northeast Region, Troy, New York, United States of America.
Alexa J McKerrow: U.S. Geological Survey, Science Analytics and Synthesis, Core Science Systems, Raleigh, North Carolina, United States of America.
Jennifer M Bayer: U.S. Geological Survey, Northwest-Pacific Islands Region, Cook, Washington, United States of America.
Management actions intended to benefit fish in large rivers can directly or indirectly affect multiple ecosystem components. Without consideration of the effects of management on non-target ecosystem components, unintended consequences may limit management efficacy. Monitoring can help clarify the effects of management actions, including on non-target ecosystem components, but only if data are collected to characterize key ecosystem processes that could affect the outcome. Scientists from across the U.S. convened to develop a conceptual model that would help identify monitoring information needed to better understand how natural and anthropogenic factors affect large river fishes. We applied the conceptual model to case studies in four large U.S. rivers. The application of the conceptual model indicates the model is flexible and relevant to large rivers in different geographic settings and with different management challenges. By visualizing how natural and anthropogenic drivers directly or indirectly affect cascading ecosystem tiers, our model identified critical information gaps and uncertainties that, if resolved, could inform how to best meet management objectives. Despite large differences in the physical and ecological contexts of the river systems, the case studies also demonstrated substantial commonalities in the data needed to better understand how stressors affect fish in these systems. For example, in most systems information on river discharge and water temperature were needed and available. Conversely, information regarding trophic relationships and the habitat requirements of larval fishes were generally lacking. This result suggests that there is a need to better understand a set of common factors across large-river systems. We provide a stepwise procedure to facilitate the application of our conceptual model to other river systems and management goals.
References
Environ Monit Assess. 2013 Nov;185(11):9385-96
[PMID: 23715733]
