Table of Contents - Robust Redhorse 2004 Return_of_Natives.pdf · 2 COMMUNITY GUIDE for RESTORATION of FISH & AQUATIC SPECIES The Southeast Rivers & Streams ProjectA According to

1COMMUNITY GUIDE for RESTORATION of FISH & AQUATIC SPECIES

The Southeast: Biodiversity Center of North AmericaCHRISTINE OLSENIUS, Executive DirectorSoutheast Watershed Forum

Return of the Natives: A Global Perspective WENDY SMITH, Director-Southeast Rivers and Streams ProgramWorld Wildlife Fund

Return of the Natives: A Regional PerspectiveSAM HAMILTON, Regional DirectorU. S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Return of the Natives: A State PerspectiveGARY MYERS, Executive DirectorTennessee Wildlife Resources Agency

Recovering the Robust RedhorseJIMMY EVANS, Senior Fisheries BiologistGeorgia Department of Natural Resources

Restoring the River FiltersDON HUBBS, Tennessee Wildlife Resources AgencySTEVE AHLSTEDT, U.S. Geological Survey

Project in Works to Restore Mussels in Big South ForkMORGAN SIMMONsKnoxville News Sentinel

Interrupted Rocksnail Reintroduction to the Coosa RiverSABRINA F. NOVAK, Research Coordinator Tennessee Aquarium Research Institute

Restoring Imperiled Fish to Great Smokey Mountains National ParkPATRICK L. RAKES

Conservation Fisheries, Inc.

Long Live the King: The Sturgeon Returns to the Upper TennesseeSABRINA F. NOVAK, Research Coordinator-Tennessee Aquarium Research InstituteROB TODD, Rivers Coordinator-Tennesse Wildlife Resources Agency

Restoring the Endangered Shortnose Sturgeon: The Ogeechee River Cooperative InitiativeTHOMAS D. BRYCE, Chief of Fisheries, Fish & Wildlife Branch, Fort Stewart/Hunter AAF

The Mighty DuckPAUL D. JOHNSON, DirectorTennessee Aquarium Research Institute

Striped Bass Restoration in the SoutheastEdited by THOMAS SINCLAIR, Office of Fisheries, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Contributing authors: ROBERT CURRY, PETE KORNEGAY, JIM ESTES, MATT THOMAS

Working with Private Landowners to Protect the Rare Barrens TopminnowBRAD BINGHAM, Tennessee Private Lands CoordinatorU. S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Resource page

Table of ContentsPAGE

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

12

14

16

18

20

Inside back cover

2 COMMUNITY GUIDE for RESTORATION of FISH & AQUATIC SPECIES

The Southeast Rivers & Streams Project

AAccording to studies by The Nature

Conservancy and World Wildlife Fund, theTennessee and Cumberland River Basins have thehighest number of fish, mussels and crayfishspecies and the highest number of endemicspecies in North America. Endemic means thatthey have adapted to a unique environment andare found no where else on earth. Together withthe Mobile River Basin, these freshwater resourcesare among the most species-rich, temperateecosystems in the world! They are to the temper-

ate regions, what the rain forestis to the tropics. Using just onesoutheastern river as compari-son, the chart below illustratesthe number of native fish in theConasauga River of Georgia,versus other major river basinsin the country.

Water resources are one ofthe region’s greatest economicassets.

Given the economic value offishing and water-based recre-ational activity, protecting andpromoting the rivers of theSoutheast should be a priorityof every state. But what iswidely known to aquatic scien-tists and watershed associations,is relatively unknown to others.This lack of awareness com-bined, with poor land use plan-ning in the face of growth anddevelopment pressures, almostensures that loss of native fishand aquatic life will continue.

UNPARALLELEDWATERS IN PERIL

Currently, 34 percent ofNorth American fish specieslisted as endangered, threatenedor of special concern are foundin the Southeast. And 90 per-

cent of the native mussel species designated asendangered, threatened or of special concern arefound in the Southeast. Their survival is interde-pendent. Mussels filter water providing a healthi-er habitat for fish (and humans).

Without proper land use practices, new and

expanding communities will further stress watersupplies and place increased threats to fish andaquatic habitat, especially in the small creeks thatserve as nurseries to over 50 percent of aquaticspecies. And if the creeks are lost, so will therivers, lakes, and coastal estuaries.

RETURN OF THE NATIVESReturn of the Natives celebrates the diverse

partnerships forming across the region to stemthe tide of species loss, and to build a foundationfor future species recovery. While under-funded,these efforts are NOT under-appreciated. Dollarfor dollar they provide a disproportionate amountof value to the local outdoor economy and quali-ty of life. It is hoped that these successful casestudies will inspire other cooperative communityinitiatives and provide a template for replication.Restoration and reintroduction efforts can be dif-ficult and costly, and they remind us how muchmore efficient it would be to prevent the lossesand preserve the habitat in the first place. Wehope that the case studies in this report will:

• Provide a blueprint for local efforts to restorenative fish and aquatic species

• Encourage communities to implement landuse practices that will protect the habitat andwater quality essential to biological diversity

• Highlight the importance of public-privatepartnerships to achieve habitat protection

• Build regional awareness, pride and value inhaving some of the most biologically diversewatersheds in the world.

Return of the Natives is a prophesy of hopethat a vibrant freshwater resource may be sus-tained, if we are willing to implement watershed-friendly land use practices and join in collabora-tive efforts to protect the creeks, rivers and coastalestuaries that serve as vital habitat for fish andaquatic life. This publication offers a guide to analternative future; one that balances growth anddevelopment with the world-class resources thatmake this region the special place we call home.

To develop initiatives in your community, con-tact one or more of the agencies and organizationslisted on the inside back cover.

CHRISTINE OLSENIUS

Executive DirectorSoutheast Watershed Forum

The Southeast: Biodiversity Center of North America

Richard Olsenius

Paul Johnson


WENDY SMITH

DirectorWorld Wildlife Fund’s SoutheastRiver & Streams Program

The Southeast Rivers & Streams ProjectReturn of the Natives: A Global Perspective

“ I started out thinking

of America as highways

and state lines. As I got to

know it better, I began to

think of it as rivers. Most

of what I love about the

country is the gift of rivers.

America is a great story,

and there’s a river on

every page.”Charles Kuralt

TThose of us living in the American Southeast

are blessed with an abundance of rivers andstreams. Picturesque names like Talking RockCreek, Hanging Dog Creek and Mama’s Creekblend with the languages of the Cherokee,Choctaw, Chickasaw and Creek Indian Nationsin names like Hiawassee, Tellico, Coosa,Tallapoosa, Cahaba and Conasauga. The mightyTennessee River was known by the Cherokee asWahatchee meaning “great river” and the state ofTennessee’s name evolved from the Cherokee,Tanasi – meaning, “meeting place”.

These rivers and streams abound with a diver-sity of aquatic life second only to the AmazonBasin. More than 250 species of crayfish, nearly300 species of mussels, and over half of all fresh-water fish species in the United States are foundin the waters of the Southeast. Many nativespecies are found in just one stream or watershedhere and nowhere else on Earth.

WHY IS THIS PLACE SO SPECIAL?Escaping the steamroller of glaciation during

the Ice Age helped. The killer cold that froze outspecies in more northern climes, didn’t hit hereas hard. Still the cold temperatures forced speciesto adapt to very specific places (known by us asendemics). From the mountain streams of theCumberland Plateau to the fertile piedmont andcoastal plains of the Gulf of Mexico, the variedgeography – knobs and ridges, valleys andswamps – of the region and the climate alongthese rivers and streams have created a uniquerange of habitats.

WORLD WILDLIFE FUND’S ROLEWorld Wildlife Fund (WWF) believes that to

preserve the diversity of life; the systems uponwhich life depends – forests, deserts, rivers, wet-lands, mangroves and coral reefs – must also bepreserved. Because many of these places are rap-idly disappearing, and because limited resourcesare available to protect them, WWF set priorityareas. An essential goal is saving representativeexamples of each of the many distinct expres-sions of life here on earth — a kind of modernday Noah’s Ark.

To guide the work, WWF scientists identifiedmore than 200 outstanding terrestrial, freshwaterand marine habitats – places that we must pro-tect if we are to preserve the web of life. These

places are known as the Global 200 Ecoregions.WWF focuses its effort on conserving a subset ofthese ecoregions, one of which is the SoutheastRivers and Streams.

We work with partners and stakeholdersthroughout the region to encourage a vision forthis place, a vision that will ensure that its uniquenatural resources survive for future generations.

We envision a region of healthy rivers andstreams, where distinctive species like theSmoky Madtom, Paddlefish and TennesseeHeelsplitter populations thrive, and where peo-ple can safely fish and swim in the waters neartheir homes, whether they live in the country orthe city. This region will be filled with riverswhere lake sturgeon can thrive and mussel pop-ulations are healthy and with people who recog-nize that whatever happens on the land affectsthe rivers, and who work to protect their streamand riverside landscapes to ensure clean fresh-water resources.

We envision communities where humanneeds are balanced with those of nature, wherepeople recognize that part of what makes theregion rich, both now and in the future, is itsnatural capital –its freshwater resources. We envi-sion communities where people understand andcelebrate the role that nature plays in their lives,a region where conserving natural resources is anintegral part of business and political practices,and where people take pride in their role as stew-ards of the land and water.

We have an ambitious vision, some would saynaïve, but I believe that all change starts with aconversation. The threats to our aquaticresources are the result of human activities suchas suburban development and agricultural,forestry and mining practices. We all have a handin creating these threats and a role in protectingand restoring our aquatic resources, if for noother reason than ensuring clean water for ourcommunities. It takes money to make thesechanges, but in my mind it really isn’t aboutmoney as much as it is about the willingness tothink and plan differently. As Albert Einsteinsaid, “We cannot solve the problems that wehave created with the same thinking that createdthem.” It’s evident from the successful reintro-duction work we see in this book that this isalready occurring.

A “good luck” smooch given to ayoung lake sturgeon by WendySmith, Director of the WorldWildlife Fund’s Southeast RiversProgram and Charles Saylor,Aquatic Biologist for the TennesseeValley Authority prior to release inthe French Broad River.


SAM HAMILTON

Southeast Regional Director U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service


TThe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's fisheries

program has played a vital role in conserving andmanaging fish and other aquatic resources since1871. Today we partner with states, tribes, othergovernment and Service programs, private organi-zations, public institutions and interested citizensin a larger effort to conserve these importantresources.

The southeastern United States is a region thathas more freshwater aquatic species than any other— 62 percent of our nation’s freshwater fishes and75 percent of its freshwater mussels.

Our region comes by this great naturalresource, because we have the highest aquaticdiversity in the nation, more than 70 major riverbasins, and 26,000 miles of coastal shoreline. Thevariety of aquatic habitats includes cold-watermountain streams and lakes, large reservoirs, estu-aries, major river basins, wetlands and near-shorecoastal areas.

There's a truism that says, the more you have,the more you have to lose. Truisms often have a

way of coming close to hitting the mark, and inthis instance this one certainly does, because morethan one-third of all North American fish species,and 90 percent of all mussel species, listed eitheras endangered, threatened, or of special concern,occur in the Southeast.

Across the board, these losses can be attributedprimarily to loss of habitat, over harvesting, andintroduction of non-native species. For instance:

• Some 144 major dams and reservoirs havebeen constructed on southeastern streams andrivers, dramatically altering habitat, disruptingfish migration, water flows and impactingwater quality.

• A recent report published by The NatureConservancy identified five watershed hotspots in the Southeast, where freshwater speciesbiodiversity was considered to be especiallythreatened.

• Human populations in the South Atlantic andGulf states are projected to grow by 73 and 46percent, respectively, by 2020.

• About 100 non-native species have been intro-duced into the southeastern United States.

These daunting statistics may seem irreversibleand impossible for us to address, but I believe theyare not. Conserving and restoring our Southeastaquatic resources requires that we all - federal,state, industry, private organizations, and individ-ual members of the general public - becomeinvolved. We must first recognize that no oneagency, group, or individual has all the knowledge,resources, and authority to accomplish this alone.It is only by working together through partner-ships that we will make a difference.

Collaborative efforts such as the SoutheastWatershed Forum and the Southeast AquaticResources Partnership will be essential to our suc-cess. The development of this restoration guidebook will give us an invaluable tool, allowing us togain a better understanding of the aquaticresources issues we are facing in our region. Moreimportantly, it will guide us in identifying andimplementing necessary corrective actions.

We in the Service are strongly committed toworking with all of our partners and stakeholdersto conserve our fisheries and aquatic resources forthe continuing benefit, use, and enjoyment of theAmerican people.

Return of the Natives: A Regional Perspective

SOUTHEAST AQUATIC RESOURCES PARTNERSHIP

The Southeast Aquatic Resources Partnership (SARP) was initiated in 2001 toaddress the myriad issues related to the management of aquatic resources in thesoutheast region. SARP is comprised of representatives from 14 southeastern states(Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, South Carolina, Oklahoma, North Carolina,Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, Virginia, Texas. and Arkansas), theU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission (GSMFC), and the South Atlantic FisheryManagement Council (SAFMC). All Southeastern Association of Fish and WildlifeAgencies (SEAFWA) states are invited to participate. SARP focuses on six key issueareas of greatest concern and interest to the Southeast: 1) Public Use, 2) FisheryMitigation, 3) Imperiled Fish and Aquatic Species Recovery, 4) Inter-jurisdictionalFisheries, 5) Aquatic Habitat Conservation, and 6) Aquatic Nuisance Species.

This partnership envisions a southeastern United States with healthy and diverseaquatic ecosystems that support sustainable public use. SARP was formed under therealization that the individual members lack sufficient resources to effectively achievetheir missions and must therefore work cooperatively to design a process that willattain the desired common goals. The intent of SARP is to develop State and Federalpartnerships that will extend beyond the traditional boundaries of fishery resourcemanagement agencies and will establish a commitment to truly work together for thebenefit of the resource. It will shift the focus beyond what are individual Federal andState responsibilities to what are our joint responsibilities to the resource. Long termsuccess of this partnership will require that we move to a higher level of coordinationbuilt upon mutual trust that will focus on making things happen at the ground level.


GARY MYERS

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency


TThe southeast United States is blessed with

more aquatic freshwater species than any otherregion in the nation. We have 505 (62%) of ournation’s freshwater fish species and 222 (75%)of our country’s mussel species. The source ofthis species diversity is our great variety of land-forms and resulting habitats.

People find this landscape diversity attractiveand useful. As our human population expands,the pressures on aquatic resources haveincreased at an alarming rate. Urban sprawl ishaving a major effect in the Southeast by reduc-ing wetlands, water quality and stream flows.Five of the top ten most sprawling U.S. metro-politan areas of at least 1 million people are inthe Southeast. Additionally, 9 of the top 17states losing the most open space and farmlandto urban sprawl are in the Southeast. Man’sactivities to control rivers and streams with atleast 144 major dams and reservoirs has alteredor eliminated aquatic habitat. These dams pro-vide recreation, electric power, navigation andflood control, which we all enjoy. But they alsohave disrupted fish migration, water flows, andhave impacted water quality. Demand for recre-ational use of aquatic resources continues toincrease. Currently the Southeast has morelicensed anglers than any other region with

highest economic return on recreational fishing($17 billion annually).

Thirteen state resources agencies, the U.S.Fish & Wildlife Service, the National MarineFisheries Service, coastal fisheries commissionsand councils and private resource groups havecreated a partnership to address these complexissues. The Southeast Aquatic ResourcesPartnership or SARP envisions a southeasternUnited States with healthy and diverse aquaticecosystems that support sustainable public use.Members realize that individually they lack theresources to achieve their missions and mustwork cooperatively to achieve common goals.The partnership recognizes that aquaticresources are rapidly approaching a crisis point.Nationally, a third of our freshwater fish speciesare at risk of extinction, 72% of our mussels areimperiled, and almost 400 aquatic species are introuble in some portion of their range. TheSoutheast is responsible for 34% of the fishspecies that are in trouble nationwide and 90%of the mussels. SARP is aware of the problems,recognizes the urgency for action, and is doingits best to make a difference for aquaticresources across our landscape. I think it will bedifficult, but I know they will succeed.

Return of the Natives: A State Perspective

“ Demand for recre-

ational use of aquatic

resources continues to

increase. Currently the

Southeast has more

licensed anglers than

any other region with

highest economic return

on recreational

fishing.”Eric

Lon

g, F

lori

da F

ish a

nd W

ildlif

e C

omm

issio

n

A future fisherman’s first catch.


Recovering the Robust Redhorse

TThe robust redhorse (Moxostoma robustum)

is a large redhorse sucker originally native toAtlantic slope rivers from the Pee Dee River inNorth and South Carolina to the Altamaha RiverBasin in Georgia. First described in 1870 by thefamous naturalist Edward Cope, the species waslost to science until 1991 when it was “rediscov-ered” by Georgia Department of NaturalResources (GADNR) biologists in the OconeeRiver of central Georgia. Subsequent surveys havelocated additional isolated populations in theOcmulgee River in Georgia, the Savannah Riverof Georgia and South Carolina, and the Pee DeeRiver in North and South Carolina.

The robust redhorse may reach lengths ofalmost 30 inches and weights of over 15 pounds.Preferred habitat is Piedmont and upper CoastalPlain sections of larger Atlantic slope rivers con-taining suitable gravel spawning substrate.Spawning occurs over shallow gravel depositsfrom late April to early June at temperaturesbetween 65 and 75oF. Adult robust redhorse feedprimarily on small mussels and clams that arecrushed with large pharyngeal teeth. With thedecline of native mussel populations, the exoticAsiatic clam (Corbicula sp.) has become the onlyabundant food source.

The robust redhorse has disappeared frommost of its historic range, due probably toincreased erosion and sedimentation caused bydeforestation, poor agricultural practices, andurban development. Erosion harms robust red-horse populations by introducing large amountsof sediment into rivers, destroying both the cleangravel required for spawning and native musselsthat are a major food source. Other factors con-tributing to species decline include the construc-tion of dams that have destroyed habitat andinterrupted migration patterns, and more recentlythe introduction of non-native predators such asblue and flathead catfish. The robust redhorse iscurrently classified as endangered by the GeorgiaDepartment of Natural Resources.

Soon after its discovery it became obvious thatthe limited geographic range, low populationsizes, and generally low recruitment rates repre-sented serious threats to the continued survival ofthe robust redhorse. Recovery efforts were initiat-ed in 1994 and the recovery strategy soon shiftedfrom a federal listing under the EndangeredSpecies Act (ESA) to a cooperative, stakeholder

approach organized under a memorandum ofunderstanding (MOU). This approach is encour-aged under provisions of the ESA and is designedto foster more rapid, efficient, and less confronta-tional implementation of recovery activities.

The Robust Redhorse ConservationCommittee (RRCC) was established in 1995through an MOU among state and federal agen-cies, conservation groups, and the private sector.Currently with 13 signatories, the RRCC istasked to develop an understanding of the statusand biology of the species, protect and enhanceexisting populations, and reestablish additionalreproducing populations. A ConservationStrategy was developed by the RRCC to promotevoluntary conservation initiatives and stakeholderpartnerships. Examples of recovery initiativesinclude a Candidate Conservation Agreement toexpedite reintroductions into the OcmulgeeRiver, an Oconee River Flow Advisory Team toevaluate the effectiveness of conservation releasesfrom Sinclair Dam, and the development of com-prehensive policies that guide most recoveryactivities.

Recovery successes include: 1) the develop-ment of culture techniques, 2) improved under-standing of the species’ distribution, abundance,life history, and genetics, 3) habitat restorationinitiatives, and 4) the establishment of introducedpopulations in the Ocmulgee, Ogeechee, andBroad rivers of Georgia. This progress demon-strates that stakeholder partnerships can effective-ly manage imperiled species through a process ofcooperation, rather than the confrontation thatoften characterizes recovery efforts.

The 13 signatories to the MOU that created the Robust Redhorse

Conservation Committee (RRCC) are:

1. United States Fish and Wildlife Service

2. United States Army Corps of Engineers

3. United States Geological Survey Biological Resources Division

4. United States Forest Service

5. Georgia Department of Natural Resources

6. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources

7. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission

8. Georgia Power/Southern Company

9. Duke Power/Energy Company

10. Carolina Power and Light Company

11. South Carolina Electric and Gas Company

12. Georgia Wildlife Federation

13. South Carolina Aquarium

There are two cooperator members to the RRCC (but not signatories

to the MOU): North Carolina Museum of Natural History and

Georgia River Network

JIMMY EVANS

Senior Fisheries BiologistGeorgia Department of NaturalResources

Top photo was taken from a bluffin the immediate vicinity of amajor robust redhorse spawningarea located on the Oconee Riverbetween Toomsboro andMilledgeville, Georgia.

Bottom photo: The robust redhorse may reach lengths ofalmost 30 inches and weights ofover 15 pounds.

John Crutchfield, Carolina Power and Light Company

Jimmy Evans, Georgia Department of Natural Resources


DON HUBBS

Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency

STEVE AHLSTEDT

United States Geological Survey

Restoring the River Filters

FFreshwater mussels are a renewable resource

that provides important ecological and economi-cal benefits for all aquatic species, animals, andhumans. Sedentary by nature, freshwater musselcolonies known as “beds” require a stable bottomenvironment of cobble, gravel, and sand. Musselsare living biological water pumps that filter waterto extract food in the form of algae, detritus(decaying leaves and woody debris), bacteria, andsediments 24 hours a day 7 days a week over thecourse of their entire life. The filtering action ofwater provided by some mussels that can live formore than 100 years could be measured in tonsof material that are processed every day in ourrivers. Important food products generated aswaste by the filtering action of mussels areexpelled into the water. The waste product is inthe form of a pellet that serves as a basic foodsource for other aquatic species that live at thebottom of the food chain. Aquatic insects, snails,and crayfish utilize this food source and in turnare fed upon by larger predators higher up thefood chain (bream, catfish, and bass).

Mussels are the best indicators of water qual-ity because they are filter feeders. They cannotsurvive exposure to toxic chemicals and exces-sive amounts of fine sediment that clogs theirgills and interferes with feeding and reproduc-tion. Most mussel species depend on a fish thatserves as a host for tiny mussels called glochidi-um that attach as babies (a parasite) on thefish’s gills or fins for a brief period of time. Fishare important for mussels in their reproductivelife cycle because the baby mussel feeds on theblood nutrients of the host fish. Some musselsrequire certain host fish in order to completetheir life cycle and if that particular fish weredestroyed the mussel could not reproduce andwould perish. Mussels also depend on fish todisperse their offspring (hitching a ride) toother parts of a river. An abundant and diversemussel bed is indicative of a high quality fresh-water ecosystem. There is a strong correlationthat exists between mussels as living sentinels orindicators of water quality and the distribution,occurrence, and quality of both fish and otheraquatic species in rivers. Mussels are a silentwitness to the destruction of much of our fish-eries resources across the nation. Ignoring ourfreshwater mussel fauna as indicators of thequality of water and what lives in them will

only accelerate the continued destruction of ournatural resources.

The Southeastern United States is the centerof species diversity for freshwater mussels.Approximately 90 percent of the nearly 300species found in North America occurs in thisregion. However, because of their declining pop-ulations resulting from pollution and habitat lossin our river systems, dam and reservoir construc-tion for instance, nearly 70 percent of this faunaare extinct, federally listed as endangered, or inneed of special protection. Many more musselspecies are awaiting evaluation for possible list-ing. No other native faunal group in NorthAmerica approaches this level of imperilment.Despite repeated efforts by local, state, and feder-al resource agencies and non-governmental con-servation groups to educate the public and gov-ernment in the form of workshops, symposiums,National Fish and Wildlife Society meetingsincluding the formation of a Freshwater MolluskConservation Society and development of aNational Strategy for mussel conservation, ourmolluscan fauna (mussels and snails) hasn’treceived the attention or a fraction of the moneythat is needed for faunal recovery or that is allo-cated to more charismatic species.

In spite of this neglect, efforts to save thisresource in the Southeast are centered in theStates of Alabama, Kentucky, Virginia, andTennessee. Over the last 20 years, basic researchon mussel life history, host fish identifications,food habits, toxicity testing, and culture andpropagation research resulted in endangered andnon-endangered species being reared in captivityand released into the wild. This is a culminationof partnerships and pooling of scant resourcesfrom state resource agencies, the U.S. Fish andWildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S.National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, andnon-governmental conservation groups includingThe Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund,Tennessee Aquatic Research Institute, industry,and municipalities. Some rivers and river reachesthat once supported a diverse mussel fauna havebeen restored sufficiently to again support mus-sels. Joint efforts are currently underway to for-malize a recovery plan for mollusk species.

Several case studies that highlight successfulrecovery efforts in Alabama, Kentucky andTennessee, have been included in this guide.

“ Mussels are the best

indicators of water quality

because they are filter

feeders.”



TThey are Tennessee's version of the California

condor or the cactus pygmy owl, only not ascharismatic or cute. Freshwater mussels are themost threatened and rapidly declining faunalgroup in the United States, and Tennessee lies atthe epicenter of their range. Of the 297 musselsknown to occur in U.S. waters, over 90 percentlive in the Southeast.

Currently, nearly 25 percent of the Southeast'smussels are federally listed as threatened orendangered, and about 12 percent already are

extinct. Steve Ahlstedt, aquaticbiologist with the U.S.Geological Survey in Knoxville,said no other group of animalsapproaches this level of imper-ilment.

“You don't see musselsunless you look for them, butthey're tied to an intricate webof water quality," Ahlstedt said."They're indicator species.They tell us when things arefairly good and when some-thing is wrong.”

One of the most importantfreshwater mussel sanctuariesin the region is the Big SouthFork National River andRecreation Area. Located onthe northern Cumberland

Plateau in Tennessee and Kentucky, the park pro-tects 90 miles of the Big South Fork of theCumberland River and its tributaries, and harborsmore federally listed endangered aquatic speciesthan any national park in the United States.

State and federal wildlife officials are about toembark on a groundbreaking project to restorethe park's mussel population. With help from amussel hatchery at Virginia Tech, biologists willsoon be raising and releasing freshwater musselsthat have either declined in the Big South Fork orcompletely disappeared.

Currently, 26 mussel species occur in the BigSouth Fork, and six of those are federally protect-ed. Those six are the Cumberland elktoe,Cumberlandian combshell, Cumberland beanpearlymussel, oyster mussel, tan riffleshell, andthe little-wing pearlymussel.

Ahlstedt said the project's ultimate goal is toget the park's mussels off the endangered species

list."Historically, Big South Fork had as many as70 mussel species," he said.

“If we could even come close to restoring thatmany, I'd be tickled to death. But that's probablytwo lifetimes worth of work.”

Biologists spent two years testing the tech-niques that will be used to propagate and releaserare mussels in the Big South Fork.

An environmental study was reworked so parkmanagers could better address the concerns of theoil and gas industry, which opposed the project,as well as horseback riding groups.

Park biologist Steve Bakaletz said mussels inthe Big South Fork already receive protectionunder existing state and federal water pollutionlaws. “In essence, we argued it was wrong for pol-luters to wipe out the mussels in the first placeand that bringing them back does not put anymore of a regulatory burden on them thanalready exists under the Clean Water Act,”Bakaletz said.

While the mussel decline in the Big SouthFork has been considerable, recent surveys indicatethe river is slowly recovering from past pollutionsources such as coal mining and timber harvest-ing. Nowadays the main impact on park waters isfrom sediment washed from dirt roads outsidethe park. Oil and gas wells — most of which arein the New River watershed — also are a majorconcern.

Biologists hope to release a round of juvenilemussels into the Big South Fork as early as thissummer. One of the main goals is to expand themussels’ range throughout the park so the popu-lation as a whole is less vulnerable.

With 380 miles of horse trails, the Big SouthFork attracts more horseback riders than anynational park in the country. Three years ago thepark service placed flags across the main rivercrossings at Station Camp and Big Island to keephorses from walking across the mussel beds.

Bakaletz said the damage done to mussels byhorseback riders is minor compared to outsidepollution threats.

“Yes, horses may crush some mussels, butthey’re not interfering with reproduction,”Bakaletz said. "Recreation is part of our business,and it's our job to do it right. We can be the No.1 destination for horseback riders. We just haveto make sure the environment doesn't getharmed.”

Project in Works to Restore Mussels in Big South Fork

MORGAN SIMMONS

Knoxville News Sentinel

Reprinted by permission of the Knoxville News

Sentinel.

NOTE:

To secure much-needed financial support, the

Big South Fork National River and Recreation

Area needs 1000 people to sign up for their new

license plate.

Go to [email protected].

Scientists inventory mussels on theBig South Fork of the CumberlandRiver.



TThe small aquatic snail that you see here

may not look like much, but it is a member ofa very elite group of mollusks. The interruptedrocksnail (Leptoxis foremani) was consideredextinct until 1997 when a U.S. GeologicalSurvey (USGS) biologist re-discovered a singleindividual in the Oostanaula River located innorthwest Georgia. Determined by an extensivesurvey done by the Tennessee AquariumResearch Institute (TNARI), the distribution ofthe interrupted rocksnail is currently limited toa section of the Oostanaula in Gordon andFloyd counties, Georgia. Currently a “candi-date” species for federal listing by the U.S. Fishand Wildlife Service (USFWS) under theEndangered Species Act (ESA), it has beeneliminated from over 99% of its historic rangewithin the Coosa River system.

Coosa River Basin existing populations ofthe interrupted snail disappeared over time dueto habitat modifications through constructionof dams, siltation, and water pollution. In addi-tion to the interrupted rocksnail, 36 other snailspecies are known to have disappeared from theCoosa River. All of these are riverine speciesthat have life cycles adapted to flowing water.In addition to the loss of water flow, dams alsofacilitate siltation (deposition of sediments).Behind the dams, sediments cover the rocks onthe bottom of the river, which snails and otherorganisms inhabit.

PARTIES INVOLVEDThe interrupted rocksnail reintroduction is a

project of the Alabama Division of Wildlife andFreshwater Fishes. Other cooperators are theTennessee Aquarium Research Institute, U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service, The NatureConservancy, Alabama Department ofConservation and Natural Resources, and theU.S. Geological Survey.

CAPTIVE REARING OF ROCKSNAILSOnce the snail was re-discovered, the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service contacted TNARI tolocate more of the snails in the Oostanaula andbegin an artificial propagation program.Scientists located more snails and brought themback to the lab to attempt to reproduce them incaptivity for release into the wild. In this way,the natural population would be augmented

with more individuals through captive rearingof snails. The interrupted rocksnail occurs inlow numbers and the species cannot be trans-located without endangering the host popula-tion. The first year of artificial propagation, alimited number of juveniles were produced.The following year, holding tank modificationswere completed and 800-1000 snails were pro-duced. In 2003, captive brood stock hatchedand reared in captivity reproduced and about2000 snails were produced.

RELEASE INTO THE COOSA RIVERIn December 2003, the interrupted rocksnail

was reintroduced into the Coosa River afterbeing extirpated (totally eliminated) for about80 years from the mainstem of the river. Morethan 3,000 snails were released by the AlabamaDepartment of Conservation and NaturalResources two miles below Jordan Dam nearWetumpka. In 1990, Alabama Power Companybegan minimum water flow releases of 2,000cubic feet per second below Jordan Dam. Byputting more water flow into this section of theCoosa River, it has improved the habitat foraquatic life such as the rocksnail. According toJeff Gardner, a biologist with the Division ofWildlife and Freshwater Fishes, this stretch ofriver has become one of the best examples offree-flowing large-river habitat left in the south-eastern U.S.

The interrupted rocksnail project is the firstreintroduction within the Coosa River system,and paves the way for possible other imperiledspecies reintroductions down the road.

For information about this project, contact JeffGardner at 256-767-7673.

Sabrina F. NovakResearch Coordinator Tennessee Aquarium ResearchInstitute

Interrupted Rocksnail Reintroduction to the Coosa River

Photo below top: Leptoxis foremaniadult shell. They are called “interrupted“because of the ridges that interrupttheir otherwise smooth shells. Photo belowright: Juvenile three monthold interrupted rocksnail as seenthrough a microscope.Photo below left: Interrupted rocksnailssettling into their new home in theCoosa River below Jordan Dam.

Paul

Joh

nson

Paul

Joh

nson

Sabr

ina

Nov

ak

“ In addition to the

interrupted rocksnail,

36 other snail species

are known to have

disappeared from the

Coosa River.”

P

PATRICK L. RAKES

Conservation Fisheries, Inc.


SCOPE: lowermost free-flowing 10.4 milesof Abrams Creek below Abrams Falls fromLittle Bottoms to Chilhowee Lake reservoirembayment.

COST: currently funded through Section 6funds from Tennessee Wildlife ResourcesAgency (TWRA) @ ~$25,000/yr; initiated in1986 @ <$5,000/yr. This does not includesubstantial in kind contributions (>25%match) from volunteers and ConservationFisheries, Inc staff.

LOCATION: Abrams Creek, tributary toLittle Tennessee River (Chilhowee Lake),Great Smoky Mountains National Park

(GSMNP), south of Maryville, BlountCounty, Tennessee.

PERMITS: Scientific Collections Permitsfrom TWRA and North Carolina WildlifeResources Commission (NCWRC); NCWRCEndangered Species Permit; U.S. Fish &Wildlife Service (FWS) Region 4 Federal Fishand Wildlife Permit (all with highly specificconditions and authorizations for eachspecies).

CONTACT: Patrick L. Rakes, ConservationFisheries, Inc. (CFI); 865-521-6665; [email protected]

Restoring Imperiled Fish to Abrams Creek, Great Smoky Mo untains National Park

PROJECT DESCRIPTIONPreviously thought to be extinct, the smoky

madtom (Noturus baileyi), and yellowfin mad-tom (N. flavipinnis), have been rediscovered inCitico Creek near Knoxville, Tennessee. Theywere the objects of a Master’s thesis by Universityof Tennessee-Knoxville (UTK) grad studentsGerry Dinkins and Peggy Shute, under the guid-ance of Dr. David Etnier. At. that time the ideaarose to use the Citico Creek populations torestore the lost Abrams Creek populations.Propagation would be required since thesespecies exist in low densities and are too difficultto collect for translocations to be feasible. TheTennessee Wildlife Resources Agency has contin-uously funded the project over the years. Theduskytail darter (Etheostoma percnurum) andspotfin chub (Erimonax monachus) were added

to the effort in the mid 1990s. The CherokeeNational Forest (CNF) has continuously fundedmonitoring to ensure the status of the sourcepopulations in Citico Creek. The North CarolinaWildlife Resources Commission has granted per-mission to collect spotfin chubs from the LittleTennessee River in North Carolina for captivepropagation. The nonprofit Friends of TheSmokies and Trout Unlimited have assisted GreatSmoky Mountain National Park and theTennessee Valley Authority (TVA) in riparianrestoration efforts along Abrams Creek in CadesCove, a beautiful setting within the park.

The Abrams Creek restoration project beganin 1986 with a Memorandum of Understanding(MOU) between Tennessee Wildlife ResourcesAgency, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, USDAForest Service Cherokee National Forest (CNF),the National Park, and the University ofTennessee, Knoxville.

BARRIERS OVERCOMEIt is notable that substantial survivorship and

wild reproduction of reintroduced fish were notobserved until the mid-1990s and that such pio-neering restoration efforts may require significanttime intervals for success. Also, the true costs ofthe effort are much greater than the actual fund-ing levels suggest, due to substantial in kind con-tributions by Conservation Fisheries, Inc, gradu-ate students, government agency personnel, andother volunteers. While it now appears thatviable populations of both madtoms and theduskytail darter are established in Abrams Creek,

“ Successfully restoring

sensitive fish species is a

long slow process, requir-

ing many years or even

decades of effort.”

Male tangerine


the spotfin chub has not been established. Manymore years of effort will likely be required tomonitor, protect, and manage the reintroducedpopulations and to determine whether thespotfin chub can be successfully reintroduced.Ironically, even though the watershed of AbramsCreek is entirely within federally protected lands,its water and habitat quality have been negativelyimpacted by land use practices above the reintro-duction reaches in Cades Cove and by theunknowing activities of National Park visitors.Identifying and correcting activities harmful tothese sensitive fish species has been an ongoingprocess in both Citico and Abrams Creeks—onethat would be much more difficult to implementon private lands! Even on public lands, today anMOU between interested parties would not like-ly be implemented to initiate the restoration ofendangered species. The more involved processof designation and review of a NonessentialExperimental Population (NEP) would berequired, with public hearings and draft andfinal publications in the Federal Record.

RESTORATION TECHNIQUES (ORMORE BARRIERS TO OVERCOME)

As noted above, restoration of these federallylisted fish species required captive propagationand reintroductions, primarily to minimizeimpacts on the only remaining (and fragile)source populations. Because of the small size ofthese fish, as well as financial limitations, allhusbandry, propagation, and rearing tech-niques were developed in closed system aquar-ia, based on techniques known for the mostsimilar species in the aquarium trade orthrough previous graduate student experiencewith related but common native species. Manyyears were required to innovate and refine pro-tocols at all points in the process, from egg andlarval collection techniques (snorkeling withhand nets and turkey basters), through eggincubation and rearing of the fish (in complexmulti-aquarium systems), to safely monitoringrestored populations (snorkeling, often at night,with blacklights to illuminate fluorescent-tagged fish). Besides collection of wild-spawnednests, the fish are also induced to captivelyspawn, by manipulating temperature and lightto mimic natural seasonal variation. Standardhatchery techniques for stripping eggs and milt

from game fish are impossible with such smallfish that produce few eggs, exhibit parentalcare, have specialized spawning sites and com-plicated courtships, and/or release a few eggs ata time over a prolonged period of time.

LESSONS LEARNEDPatience. Successfully restoring sensitive fish

species is a long slow process, requiring manyyears or even decades of effort. The cooperativeeffort of many diverse partners is required.Background research and/or experience with theorganisms and their life history and habitatrequirements are essential. Innovative approachesmay be required, because every organism andevery restoration effort has unique and unfore-seeable characteristics.

o untains National Park

Photos from top to bottom:duskytail darter, smokey madtom,yellowfin madtom.

Phot

os: B

rad

Bin

gham

, U.S

. Fish

& W

ildlif

e Se

rvic

e

T


ROB TODD

Rivers Coordinator,TennesseeWildlife Resources Agency

SABRINA F. NOVAK

Research CoordinatorTN Aquarium Research Institute

Long Live the King: Lake Sturgeon Reintroduction to the Upp er Tennessee River

The lake sturgeon belongs to an ancient fami-ly of fishes that date back 350 million years.They were once fairly abundant throughout theirrange of the upper and middle Mississippi Riverbasin, the Great Lakes and Hudson Baydrainages, and the upper Coosa River system.Habitat destruction, water quality degradation,and commercial over-harvest, especially duringthe late 1800’s and early 1900’s, contributed totheir depletion. Few self-sustaining populationsexist in the United States. Although not federallylisted, it is state-listed as either threatened orendangered in 19 of the 21 states where lakesturgeon are found. In the southeastern U.S.,lake sturgeon are rarely collected during sam-pling activities, and may be extirpated from mostwaters in their southern historic range.

Currently several states are engaging inenhancement or restoration programs to reducethe trend of dwindling populations nationwide.In the Southeast, lake sturgeon restoration programs are underway in Georgia, Missouri

and Tennessee.Lake sturgeon were extirpated (eliminated)

from east Tennessee for over 50 years primarilydue to dam construction and harvest of theremaining adult population. Improvements tothe water quality (and quantity in some cases)below Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) hydro-electric dams in east Tennessee began about 10years ago. Benthic fauna and fish populationsresponded to these improvements with dramaticincreases in diversity and numbers. The FrenchBroad River below Douglas Dam was one ofthese sites. The TVA installed a water retentionweir below the dam and oxygen injectors abovethe dam restoring minimum flows and improv-ing oxygen levels to the river. The improvementsin the fish and benthic communities downstreamsuggested the opportunity to restore lake stur-geon to the upper Tennessee River system.

A lake sturgeon recovery team was formed in1995, named the Tennessee Lake SturgeonReintroduction Working Group (TLSRWG). Itincluded most of the aquatic resourcesagencies/organizations in the region (U. S. Fish& Wildlife Agency, Tennessee Wildlife ResourcesAgency, TVA, U. S. Geological Survey, TheTennessee Aquarium Research Institute,University of Tennessee, Tennessee TechnologicalUniversity, Conservation Fisheries Inc, TennesseeClean Water Network, and the World WildlifeFund). A draft recovery plan was developed thatsame year with input from all the partners of theteam. The goal of the program is to establishself-sustaining populations that allow removal ofthe state endangered status for the species andeventually provide a future recreational fishery.

A recovery project proposal was sent toWisconsin Department of Natural Resources inDecember of 1998 in hopes of obtaining 10,000lake sturgeon eggs for rearing purposes.Wisconsin approved the proposal and by 1999,Warm Springs National Fish Hatchery inGeorgia and Cohutta Fish Hatchery (operated bythe Tennessee Aquarium Research Institute) wererearing fish from eggs collected from adult WolfRiver lake sturgeon. The following year 1,441lake sturgeon, approximately 18-24 inches long,were released into the French Broad River atthree locations. Since that time, another 21,000lake sturgeon have been reintroduced into theFrench Broad River.

Lake sturgeon touch tank at theTennessee Aquarium in Chattanooga,Tennessee. As people touch these fish,docents explain the biology of the fishand the reintroduction program

Todd

Sta

iley,

Tenn

esse

e A

quai

um

Prior to release into the wild the fish aremarked with a tag or unique mark to identifythat the fish came from the reintroductionefforts. Marking the fish also allows biologiststo identify what year the fish were hatched ifthey become recaptured after release. Some fishhave been recaptured by monitoring done byfield biologists and fishermen have reportedcatching and releasing lake sturgeon.

As they grow larger and sampling techniquesare refined, they will be easier to capture. Sportfishers continue to report catches and releases tothe recovery team partners. Even a snorkeler,searching for freshwater mussels, has reportedobserving a lake sturgeon.

This recovery effort is an extremely long-term project that requires a considerable com-mitment by the participating agencies andorganizations. Lake sturgeon releases will con-tinue for several more years until the teamdetermines whether recovery efforts have beensuccessful or not. Lake sturgeon are a long livedspecies that require 20 or more years to matureso monitoring will have to continue far into thefuture to document any spawning success.

The lake sturgeon recovery project hasreceived support and praise from political enti-ties, conservation groups, state and federal nat-ural resource agencies, educational institutions,and local landowners. The Vice-Mayor ofKnoxville, a local City Councilman, and theLeague of Women Voters have voiced supportfor the project. Students of Gap CreekElementary have participated in the releases.The public has been kept aware by a keenlyinterested news media. Two local stations havetelevised releases of lake sturgeon since 2000.The Knoxville News Sentinel newspaper haswritten two articles on the project and NationalPublic Radio has aired a segment. Crowds ofinterested citizens, usually between 25 to 60people have been present at the release events.

WHAT TO DO IF YOU CATCH ALAKE STURGEON IN TN

The lake sturgeon is listed within the Stateof Tennessee as endangered within Tennesseewaters, so keeping it is illegal. If you catch alake sturgeon, please put it back into the riverand then call the TWRA Region 4 office at(423) 587-7037 or 1-800-332-0900 to report

where the fish wascaught, its approximatesize, and how it wascaught. These reportsgreatly help programbiologists by trackingwhere fish are withinthe river system and thatthey are healthy.

Monitoring effortsare being continued bythe partnership in con-junction with graduatestudents from theUniversity of Tennesseeat Knoxville (UTK). Dr.Larry Wilson, a profes-sor at UTK, will bestarting a 2-year radio-telemetry study with2.5-foot and 1-foot lakesturgeon to track wherethe fish go once they arereleased into the river.This will allow the partners to determine whatpart of the river the fish “prefer” and this willassist in recapture efforts for monitoring pur-poses. Other monitoring efforts to be done inMay 2004 include: electroshocking, trot lining,gill netting, otter trawling, haul seining, andscuba diving to gather more information onsturgeon occurrence within the river.

To further strengthen the lake sturgeon pro-gram or any other long-term conservation pro-gram in general, support and participation fromlocal volunteers, grass-roots organizations andschool groups is important. Private landownersalong the French Broad and Holston rivers haveapproached the Tennessee Lake Sturgeon Groupto show support of the work being done tobring the sturgeon back to the river. In areasideal for release of fish, some landowners haveeven had small releases of sturgeon from theirshoreline property, becoming part of the rein-troduction effort to bring this “King of Fishes”back to the river.

If you would like to be contacted about fishreleases to bring out your family to witness theevent please send your e-mail address and requestto Sabrina Novak at [email protected].


p er Tennessee River

Photo above: Lake sturgeon arereleased into the French Broad Riverby 9-year old Alexandria Fisher andher mother, Natalie Fisher.

Photo below: Radio tag beingimplanted into a 2-year old lakesturgeon.

Geo

rge

Ben

z

Karen Estes, Tennessee Aquarium


THOMAS D. BRYCE

Chief of FisheriesFort Stewart/Hunter AAF

Restoring the Endangered Shortnose Sturgeon: The Ogeechee River Cooperative Initiative

TPROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Ogeechee and Canoochee Rivers are twoof southeast Georgia’s most beautiful “blackwater”rivers. Originating in the lower piedmont, thesewarmwater, tannic acid systems meander acrossthe flat lower coastal plain through wide bottom-land hardwood forests. Both rivers are uniqueamong Atlantic coast drainages in that they areunimpounded and the lower 58 km of theCanoochee River flows though an ecologicallydiverse 280,000-acre military installation, FortStewart. The principal focus of this restorationproject is the endangered shortnose sturgeon, asemi-anadromous fish whose population size hasbeen determined to be less than 300 adults withlittle evidence of reproductive success.

In keeping with the mandates of theEndangered Species Act, Fort Stewart and HunterArmy Airfield’s Fish and Wildlife Branch has beenmonitoring the shortnose sturgeon populationsince the 1990’s, however several questions stillelude the installation biologists: location and con-dition of spawning and rearing habitat, impact ofcontaminants on fish health, as well as effects oflow dissolved oxygen and high salinity on juvenilefish. As a result, Fort Stewart initiated the forma-tion of a multi-agency, cooperative team to moreeffectively assess the shortnose sturgeon popula-

tion, identify habitat limita-tions, and collaborate toachieve recovery of theOgeechee River system pop-ulation. The Ogeechee RiverShortnose Sturgeon WorkingGroup (ORSSWG) is thefirst river-basin specific teamorganized to recover anypopulation of shortnose stur-geon and is comprised of 14partners consisting of federaland state government agen-

cies, non-government conservation organizations,and local citizenry. This working group is current-ly building partnerships within the watershed withlocal stakeholder groups such as the Friends of theOgeechee River, Ogeechee Audubon Society, andGeorgia Chapter of the Sierra Club, to assist inmonitoring the river using Georgia’s Adopt-A-Stream methodologies.

The ORSSWG believes that the shortnosesturgeon will be instrumental in focusing restora-tion attention on the Ogeechee River and couldserve as the “poster child” for improved waterquality and water conservation within the water-shed. Key environmental stressors for theOgeechee River basin, as identified by theGeorgia’s Environmental Protection Division(EPD), include fecal coliform bacteria, nutrientloading, and methylmercury contamination of fishtissue. Like the proverbial “canary in the coalmine”, the shortnose sturgeon is serving as a bio-indicator of the health of the Ogeechee River sys-tem. Consequently, by initiating sturgeon recoveryactions in the Ogeechee River system, water quali-ty and habitat issues will be addressed, benefitingboth the river’s biotic communities as well as thewatershed residents.

BARRIERS OVERCOMEThe initial challenge faced by the Army (Fort

Stewart/Hunter Army Airfield) in managing andrecovering this fish was identifying sturgeon con-servation stakeholders within the Ogeechee Riverbasin and then assembling a comprehensive teamto more effectively restore this population. TheArmy realized that monitoring and recovery is bestaccomplished through a collaborative effort, how-ever shortnose sturgeon conservation has beensomewhat fragmented and minimized in the past,especially among Southeast populations. TheNational Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)administers recovery of the shortnose sturgeon,

SCOPE: 120 miles-plus of the OgeecheeRiver (to include it’s smaller tributary, theCanoochee River)

PRICE: Projected cost in excess of$250,000

LOCATION: The Ogeechee River watershedcovers a 5,540 square mile area, emptyinginto the Atlantic near Savannah, Georgia

PERMITS: Endangered Species CollectionPermit (National Marine Fisheries Service)

CONTACT: Thomas D. Bryce, Chief ofFisheries, Fish and Wildlife Branch, FortStewart/Hunter AAF, Georgia - 912-767-5477 - [email protected]

“ It must be

emphasized again that

restoration actions for the

shortnose sturgeon must

include restoration

initiatives for the

Ogeechee River.”

A 6' Atlantic sturgeon beingreleased after capture by FortStewart Biologists Larry Carlile(left) and Joel Fleming (right).

Tom

Bry

ce

however the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS) has historically taken the lead in devel-oping propagation and culture techniques. Inaddition, the Georgia Department of NaturalResources (DNR) had been faced with both adecade of budget shortfalls and the challenge ofwhich Division could best oversee the manage-ment of this fish. The installation, along with thesupport of the NMFS and USFWS hosted thefirst range-wide shortnose sturgeon recovery con-ference in 2003 to gather the leading shortnosespecialists from Florida to Canada.

This successful gathering of state and federalagencies helped to unify and focus the effort ofmany agencies and as a result, the ORSSWG wasspawned. The working group’s key federal mem-bers, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,Georgia’s Environmental Protection Division, theUniversity System of Georgia, the CanoocheeRiverkeeper, and the Georgia Aquarium havejoined in this cooperative initiative. Once organ-ized, the challenge of the ORSSWG was to devel-op a recovery strategy, coordinate responsibilityroles, and secure the necessary funding. To date,all members have demonstrated commitment andenthusiasm. Additionally, DNR was instrumentalin creating an Anadromous Fish Biologist positionand reassign, all anadromous fish managementresponsibilities to the Wildlife Resources Divisionoffice located within the Ogeechee River basin.

RESTORATION TECHNIQUESIt must be emphasized again that restoration

actions for the shortnose sturgeon must includerestoration initiatives for the Ogeechee River. Halfof the recovery work must focus on the fish, itsbiology and life history, while the second halfmust focus on the fish’s habitat. Consequently,fish restoration techniques proposed include (1)the use of radio-tagged “sentinel” fish to helplocate spawning sites, (2) cryo-preservation ofOgeechee River shortnose sturgeon sperm formaintaining a gamete source with a genetic poolspecific to this river basin population, (3) captureof wild Ogeechee River shortnose sturgeon broodstock for spawning, (4) rearing of the culturedprogeny, and (5) developing a source of OgeecheeRiver hatchery-reared shortnose sturgeon thatcould be used to either conduct experimentalreleases so as to evaluate constriction points in thelife history of the fish or supplement the natural

population until the limiting factors canbe corrected and a self-sustaining popu-lation can be established.

Concurrent with the fish work, habi-tat assessment and restoration will pro-ceed that will include (1) developmentof a water quality model for evaluatingthe riverine interrelationships of temper-ature, dissolved oxygen and salinity, (2)long-term monitoring of water qualitythrough biological and chemical stream assess-ment using volunteers throughout the watershed,(3) identification and characterization of underwa-ter artesian seeps and assess their role in influenc-ing sturgeon behavior and survival, (4) identifica-tion of spawning and rearing habitat and assess-ment of habitat condition, (5) contaminant assess-ment of critical habitat sites, (6) work with theGeorgia Environmental Protection Department tomitigate identified water quality and contaminantimpacts, and (7) work with EPD to mitigate iden-tified impacts to underwater artesian seeps stem-ming from increasing aquifer withdrawals. Theselast two action items will present our biggestrestoration challenge due to the environmentalcomplexity of correcting point and non-point dis-charges and influencing aquifer withdrawal poli-cies and practices in the coastal plain of Georgia.

LESSONS LEARNEDDue to the complexity of recovering an endan-

gered species and mitigating environmentalimpacts, a single stakeholder cannot be very effec-tive even when that stakeholder is a major federalentity and the resource to be restored is a localone. A collaborative approach through the part-nering of multiple stakeholders is the only cost-effective means of tackling such a complex prob-lem. Sensitivity, wise leadership, and a strongcooperative spirit are necessary to bring togetherdiverse stakeholders. Information exchange andmutual education among the stakeholders and thecommunity are crucial for strong and effectiveteam building. Round table, face-to-face commu-nication at the local and regional levels helps tobridge institutional differences and builds mutualtrust and understanding. And lastly, it is veryimportant to bring the resource regulators as wellas the public (local citizenry and community con-servation groups) into the planning process earlyand include them on the team.


e River Cooperative Initiative

“ Due to the complexity

of recovering an endan-

gered species and mitigat-

ing environmental impacts,

a single stakeholder cannot

be very effective even when

that stakeholder is a major

federal entity and the

resource to be restored is a

local one.”

Water quality monitoring: GeorgiaSouthern University's Dr. JimReichard and Fort StewartBiologist, Kathryn Sukkestad

Tom Bryce

T


PAUL D. JOHNSON

DirectorTennessee Aquarium ResearchInstitute

The Mighty Duck

About one hour’s drive south of Nashville liesthe Duck River basin in south-centralTennessee. The 262 mile-long river crosses sevencounties before joining the Tennessee River atKentucky Lake, making it the longest river con-tained within the state of Tennessee. Over 30tributaries are present in the basin, but themajority of the river’s discharge is groundwatersupplied through the limestone rich Karsttopography in the central portion of the basin.There are four large cities located on the banksof the Duck River, Manchester in the CoffeeCounty headwaters, Shelbyville and Columbia,in the middle portion of the drainage and finallythe town of Centerville, in the lower end of thebasin. There are also two state parks (Old Fortand Henry Horton) within the basin. The DuckRiver is joined by the Buffalo River just before itmeets the Tennessee River in Hickman County.

PROBLEMATIC PASTWater quality problems have plagued the

Duck River throughout most of the 20th centu-ry. Phosphate mining and heavy clear cuttingdevastated much of the river and its watershed.The naturally thin soils were not well suited forcrop production and horse and cattle are themain agricultural products. Fortunately, themajority of point source impacts were located inColumbia, Tennessee located about mid-basin.In 1971 the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)damned the upper Duck River, and completedNormandy Dam up river of Shelbyville,Tennessee. Seasonably variable water releases andlow dissolved oxygen concentrations in watersreleased by the dam, affected the river for the

next 115 miles to Columbia, where point sourcereleases impacted the basin’s lower half.

In 1973 TVA began turning its attention tothe construction of a new dam just aboveColumbia. The 35-mile long pool of theColumbia Dam project would be much largerthan the just completed Normandy. In fact, thedam’s completion would have inundated the bestremaining riverine habitat in the basin. It alsowould have placed the only remaining habitat fortwo federally listed mussels (birdwing pearlymus-sel, Lemiox rimosus and the Cumberland mon-keyface, Quadrula intermedia) directly under thenew pool. This would have resulted in certainextirpation for both species.

With the completion of the dam looming in1977, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service issued aBiological Opinion condemning the dam’s com-pletion. In 1979 TVA placed the completion ofColumbia Dam on hold and in 1995 determinedthe project could not be completed.

A NEW DAYWith the implementation of the Clean Water

Act, point source discharges were gradually elim-inated from the river during the 1980’s.Problems with a wastewater treatment plant inShelbyville were corrected and chlorine emissionssubstantially reduced. Lands purchased for thenow defunct Columbia Dam project lay fallow.One final ingredient remained for recovery:addressing the irregular seasonal flows and lowdissolved oxygen problems experienced with dis-charges from Normandy Dam.

In 1991 the TVA implemented the ReservoirRelease Improvements (RRI) program atNormandy Dam. The RRI program wasdesigned to deal with water quality problemscommon to dam tailwaters. TVA placed over twomiles of soaker hoses in the pool of Normandydam to oxygenate the water before it was releasedfrom the reservoir. Additionally, seasonal adjust-ments in discharge levels were made to shiftmore water back into the river during the springand summer seasons. In 1999 The NatureConservancy opened an office in Columbia tosupport conservation efforts in the Duck Riverwatershed and TVA removed the last physicalvestiges of Columbia Dam. In 2001 TVA donat-ed lands acquired for the dam project to theTennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA).

“ Although just 262

miles in length, south-

central Tennessee’s Duck

River, likely supports the

highest biological diversity

of any tributary system in

North America.

Cooperative efforts among

private conservationists,

state and federal wildlife

officials, and public

utilities agencies are

racing to secure this

national treasure.”Paul D. Johnson

Director, Tennessee

Aquarium Research

Institute

Mussels in hand,Quadrula intermedia,Cumberland monkeyface.


A STUNNING COMEBACKWith all recovery elements in place, the last

element needed was time. Ten years after TVAinitiated the RRI program, a new molluskinventory of the basin was commissioned byThe Nature Conservancy and TWRA to deter-mine how well this most sensitive fauna hadresponded to recovery efforts. Freshwater mol-lusks are the most imperiled group of animalson the planet, and the rivers of the Southeastare the global epicenter of freshwater molluskspecies diversity. Scientists from the UnitedStates Geological Survey (USGS) and theTennessee Aquarium Research Institute(TNARI) were contacted to lead the surveyproject. Now nearing completion, this study hasshown a remarkable turnaround in the mollus-can resources of the Duck River. The river basincontains 54 species of freshwater mussels and22 species of freshwater snails. Mussel densitieshave increased between 2-6 fold since 1988,and the range and numbers of endangeredspecies have increased exponentially. Musseldiversity was greatest in the town of Columbiawhere 33 species of freshwater mussels nowreside in an area that was too toxic for most ofthese species a generation ago. Additionally, asmall fish survey of the lower Duck River found97 species of fish residing in a half-mile sectionof river. “This is THE river recovery story inthe nation, but nobody knows about it outsidethis state” states Leslie Colley with The NatureConservancy’s Duck River Office. “We’ve recov-ered a river system to the point that it supportshealthy populations of the most sensitive of

species”. With the mollusk fauna already goneor rapidly disappearing from most southeasternrivers, the Duck River stands in stark contrastto the degradation in the region.

The upper Duck River Utility has also assist-ed recovery efforts through extensive planningof water needs in the basin. Based upon exten-sive flow modeling, the utility has estimatedthey can meet water supply needs in the basinfor the next 50 years. With some minor adjust-ments in the operation of Normandy Dam, theutility authority can meet the water supplyneeds of the basin for years to come.

UNCERTAIN FUTUREEven with this remarkable partnership

between state, federal and private agencies, all ofthis may not be enough to maintain the successthat has been achieved. Explosive growth aroundNashville will degrade the watershed withoutbetter planning. The long term prognosis is notgood if sound environmental planning withinthe basin is not achieved. But with proper plan-ning, the Duck River can remain a biologicaltreasure not only for Tennessee, but the nation.

Recovery Project Partners:The Nature Conservancy – Duck River OfficeTennessee Wildlife Resources AgencyTennessee Aquarium Research InstituteTennessee Valley AuthorityUpper Duck River Utility CooperativeU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceU.S. Geological Survey

DUCK RIVER

BIODIVERSITY COUNT

Source: TVA Heritage, United States

Geological Survey, and Tennessee

Aquarium Research Institute

Taxa Species

Periphyton and algae 87

Zooplankton 45

Flatworms and Oligochaete 32

Non-insect arthropods 25

Freshwater Insects 225

Freshwater snails 22

Freshwater mussels 5

Fishes 147

Frogs and Turtles 15

Total Species Count > 652

species

Photo below left:Steve Ahlstedt USGS - WRD - Knoxville,TN and Richard G. Biggins USFWS -Asheville, NC (retired) working with mus-sels collected in the Duck Riverbelow Carpenters Bridge, Maury Co., TN.

Photo below right:Duck River Hoopers Island

Paul Johnson Paul Johnson

S


Edited byTHOMAS SINCLAIR

Office of FisheriesU.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Contributing authorsROBERT CURRY AND PETE

KORNEGAY

North Carolina Wildlife ResourcesCommissionJIM ESTES

Florida Fish & WildlifeConservation CommissionMATT THOMAS

Georgia Department of NaturalResources

Striped Bass Restoration in the Southeast

Striped bass populations along the SouthAtlantic and Gulf Coasts experienced dramaticdeclines beginning in the 1950s and continuingthrough the 1980s. This period of decline wascoincidental with increased urbanization, pollu-tion, groundwater extraction, over harvest, andwater development projects creating reservoirs instriped bass watersheds. These factors collectivelyacted to degrade water quality and cool waterrefuge areas (refugia), change water dischargequantity, and block access to traditional spawninggrounds.

Beginning in the late 1980s, Federal and Statefisheries management agencies began extensiveefforts to counteract these declines. Three majorefforts within the Apalachicola, Roanoke, andSavannah River Basins are indicative of the coop-erative effort needed to restore southeasternstriped bass populations.

APALACHICOLA RIVER BASINBy 1980, the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-

Flint (ACF) river system, in Florida, Georgia, andAlabama, harbored the only known reproducingGulf race population within its historic range.

Dams in the ACF blocked striped bass migra-tion to spawning grounds and coolwater thermalrefuges. Egg and young-of–the-year surveys con-ducted in 1985 demonstrated that successful natu-ral reproduction in the ACF was limited andprobably confined to the Flint River. As a result, acooperative agreement was forged between theconservation agency directors of Florida, Georgia,

and Alabama, and the Regional Director of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service to formalize

restoration of native striped bass within the ACF.Initial attempts to capture and propagate

Gulf race broodfish from the Apalachicola Riverwere successful, and hatchery production quick-ly increased. Since 1980, a total of 8.7 millionPhase I and 832,000 Phase II (6-12 inch) fin-gerlings have been stocked into Lake Seminoleand the Apalachicola River. Progeny of Gulfrace broodfish from the ACF have been releasedinto other reservoirs of the Flint andChattahoochee rivers, as well as other GulfCoast river and reservoir systems.

Angler catches in the upper ApalachicolaRiver during springtime creel surveys increasedtenfold as a result of the stockings. The ACFstriped bass fishery has become an exceedinglypopular opportunity to catch a trophy fish thatmay exceed 40 pounds.

Protection, rehabilitation, and enhancement ofcritical coolwater habitat have been important torestoration efforts. Florida Fish and WildlifeConservation Commission (FFWCC) biologistshave worked closely with the U. S. Army Corps ofEngineers (COE) to re-establish connections withsprings and creeks during hot summer months.They also cooperated to remove the Dead LakesDam on the Chipola River, which re-openedapproximately 50 miles of coolwater habitat in theupper reaches of this tributary. GeorgiaDepartment of Natural Resources (DNR)acquired and enhanced Radium Springs, a largethermal refuge on the Flint River. Known thermalrefuge springs in Lake Seminole and the FlintRiver were closed to fishing from May toNovember while adult striped bass occupy them.

There are many challenges to continued suc-cess of striped bass restoration in the ACF. LakeSeminole, the primary nursery for young stripedbass, has an abundance of aquatic plants(hydrilla), which can impact primary productivi-ty and reduce the forage base for young andadult striped bass. Rapid urbanization in theupper ACF watershed has placed increaseddemand for water withdrawals, and increasedpoint source and non-point source pollution.High groundwater demand for irrigating farm-lands may also reduce or reverse flows from cool-water springs, further diminishing importanthabitat that is already limiting.

“ After five years of

strict enforcement of

striped bass harvest limits,

along with managed river

flows during the spawning

season, the signs of recov-

ery were evident.”Coolwater thermal refuges areimportant for bass habitat.

Mik

e Sp

elm

an, F

WC


ROANOKE RIVER BASINIn 1986, Federal and State resource agencies,

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, VirginiaElectric Power Company (now DominionGeneration), municipalities, and members ofprivate industries formed an ad hoc committeeto examine changes in water release patterns inthe Roanoke River since the construction ofdams. At the same time, Federal and State agen-cies with regulatory authority over striped bassmanagement and harvest began examining pastand current characteristics of the striped bassstock and associated fisheries. These examina-tions identified a link between water releasesand striped bass productivity.

As a result, a normalized flow regime for theRoanoke River was implemented during thestriped bass spawning season. Virginia Electric andPower Company agreed to suspend hydropowerpeaking operations during a 76-day period deter-mined to be most important for striped bassspawning. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,whose upstream reservoir releases dictate overallflows, agreed to hold river discharge within brack-ets close to historical median flows unless extremeflooding or drought conditions were present. Stateresource agencies also curtailed striped bass harvestby 80% of historical averages.

After five years of strict enforcement of stripedbass harvest limits, along with managed river flowsduring the spawning season, the signs of recoverywere evident. Annual estimates of reproductivesuccess, based on catches of young-of-the-year,reached all time highs. By 1995, three strong yearclasses had been naturally produced. In 1997, theAtlantic States Marine Fisheries Commissiondeclared that the Roanoke River/Albemarle Soundstriped bass stock was restored. After that time,harvest restrictions were eased and recreationaland commercial fishermen began reaping the ben-efits of restoration process.

SAVANNAH RIVER BASINThe Savannah River once supported the largest

naturally occurring population of striped bass inGeorgia, and was the source of broodfish for thestate’s stocking program. During the 1980’s, thestriped bass population declined precipitously as adirect result of habitat degradation associated withoperation of a tide gate and its attendant channelmodifications. In response to the decreasing

striped bass population, the Georgia Departmentof Natural Resources (GADNR) adopted a stripedbass harvest moratorium for the Savannah Riverin 1988. The South Carolina Department ofNatural Resources (SCDNR) followed suit in1991. GADNR, with assistance from the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service, also initiated an inten-sive stocking program in 1989 with the goal ofreestablishing a self-sustaining population.Restoration of degraded spawning areas began in1991 with the removal of the tide gate from oper-ation and continued through 1992 with filling ofthe associated diversion canal.

Since 1995, GADNR’s annual strategy hasbeen to stock approximately 40,000 (8-10 inch)striped bass into the lower Savannah River. Thestocking program has been very successful inincreasing the number of striped bass in thelower river, and current levels are approachinghistoric highs. Anglers have noticed a resur-gence in the striped bass population over thelast several years, and a popular catch andrelease fishery has developed.

Although GADNR has been successful inincreasing the number of adult striped bass in theriver, the goal of restoring a self-sustaining popula-tion has not yet been achieved, as the majority ofthe fish are hatchery reared. Natural recruitmentof striped bass remains well below historic levels,and GADNR continues to address issues concern-ing natural recruitment and potential impacts offuture harbor development projects.

Bass fishing along the ApalachicolaRiver in the tailrace of JimWoodruff Lock & Dam near theFlorida-Georgia state line.

Mic

hael

Hill

, FW

D

Mic

hael

Hill

, FW

D

Fisherman with a 42-pound basscaught on the Apalachicola River.


BRAD BINGHAM

Tennessee Private LandsCoordinatorU.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Working with Private Landowners to Protect Habitat:The Barrens Topminnow Case Study

TThe barrens topminnow (Fundulus julisia)

once ranged across six Tennessee counties, all sit-uated on the Highland Rim in the central part ofthe state, northwest of Chattanooga. Habitat lossand modification, however, have resulted in adrastic decline of their numbers over the past 15years. As of today, only three viable populationsremain in the wild. The three remaining sites areall privately owned and located in Coffee andCannon Counties, Tennessee. All sites providesuitable habitat for the barrens topminnow, butthe small sizes, locations, and private ownershippose potential problems for the fish in the nearfuture.

DEVELOPING TRUSTAn outreach effort to develop a level of trust

between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(Service) and local landowners was launched in1997. This effort included contacting and devel-oping a working relationship with the localNatural Resource Conservation Service DistrictConservationist for each county. Their valuableknowledge of the local agricultural communityand problems related to it was an absolute neces-sity in developing successful landowner relation-ships. Problems encountered by the agriculturalcommunity and how they related to the prob-lems contributing to the decline of the barrenstopminnow populations were identified. Forexample, degraded water quality was identified as

a major cause in the decline of suitable habitat, aproblem associated with livestock production inthe area. IMPROVING WATER QUALITYUtilizing the Partners for Fish and WildlifeProgram as a funding source, practices includingfencing of livestock from riparian areas, hardenedstream crossings and accesses, hardened feedingareas, sediment removal from springs, and alter-native watering sources (tanks) have beeninstalled to reduce livestock impacts on springsand their associated runs. These practices, target-ed to improve water quality, have been installedat 18 sites since 1997. In addition, the barrenstopminnow has been returned to eight of the 18sites, all of which occur within its historic homerange.

ULTIMATE GOALUltimately, the goal of the Fish and Wildlife

Service is not only to protect and enhance exist-ing habitat, but to reestablish the barrens top-minnow throughout its historic range. By restor-ing habitat and establishing additional popula-tions of F. julisia, the need to list the speciesunder the Endangered Species Act should be pre-cluded. Therefore, by working with privatelandowners, not only can we achieve the Service’sgoal, we can also assist landowners in their dailyefforts to make a living producing livestock in amore environmentally-friendly manner.

“ . . . the goal of the

Fish and Wildlife Service

is not only to protect and

enhance existing habitat,

but to reestablish the

barrens topminnow

throughout its

historic range.”

Hoover Hancock's spring inGrundy County, Tennessee is oneof the restoration sites for the barrens topminnow shown inphoto above. B

ard

Bin

gham

, U.S

. Fish

& W

ildlif

e Se

rvic

e

Documents

Table of Contents - Robust Redhorse 2004 Return_of_Natives.pdf · 2 COMMUNITY GUIDE for RESTORATION of FISH & AQUATIC SPECIES The Southeast Rivers & Streams ProjectA According to