Duration: 10/01/2011 to 09/30/2016

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

Statement of Issues and Justification

Fish have influenced and continue to influence human settlement patterns, drive trade, supply critical food sources, offer recreational opportunities and provide a source of income for both inland and coastal human communities in the United States and abroad. For instance, according to statistics from 2006, recreational fishing alone was valued at $125 billion dollars in overall economic output and supported over one million jobs in the U.S. (www.fishhabitat.org). Additionally, as extraordinary sentinels of ecosystem and societal resilience, changes in fish community structure and production dynamics can alert us to unsustainable human activities occurring at multiple spatial and temporal scales. Agricultural Experiment Station (AES) scientists are extremely well positioned and technically capable to assist policy makers and managers by providing the scientific basis on which to guide the best management decisions for sustainable fisheries resource systems.

The habitats and communities with which fish have co-evolved and adapted have always been in flux, with individuals and populations responding to dynamic changes in climate, prey abundance, predation pressure, and habitat availability. However, the rate at which the human footprint is changing these communities exceeds the rate at which many fish species are able to adapt, leading to significant reductions in fish production and associated benefits. Numerous stakeholder interests, as reflected through the National Fish Habitat Action Plan's (NFHAP) mission statement, for example, can be addressed through the protection, restoration, and enhancement of "...the nation's fish and aquatic communities through partnerships that foster fish habitat conservation and improve the quality of life for the American people," (NFHAP 2010 Annual Update, www.fishhabitat.org). This need is further demonstrated by the introduction of legislation such as the National Fish Habitat Conservation Act, which is currently supported by numerous members of Congress and non-governmental associations like the American Sportfishing Association, as well as the recognition of 17 different Fish Habitat Partnerships. These projects highlight the importance of, and support for, cooperation across both political and ecological boundaries. Findings from the multi-state research program proposed here will meet these needs and will be used by state, federal, tribal, and associated non-governmental associations in natural resource management.

Fish are the ultimate integrators of ecosystem changes as their diversity and productivity reflect changes in the structure and function of upland ecosystems, the composition of the airshed, and the nature and dynamics of ground and surface water quantity and quality. In an increasingly globalized world which exposes our fisheries resources and their ecosystems to new threats (e.g., invasive species, diseases, climate change), it is critical to collaborate across geo-political jurisdictional boundaries and disciplinary fields to design innovative and encompassing solutions to local and broad scale challenges to the multitude of diverse waterscapes within the U.S. and in particular, the North Central Region of the AES. To achieve healthy and productive fisheries, we must assure the integrity of our freshwater ecosystems, as well as their connectivity to the landscape and to humans in order to better mediate the impacts associated with the ever-changing environmental conditions. This important link between the quantity and quality of freshwater and sustainable fisheries makes it imperative for our researchers and managers to compare stressors on these resources among the principally agriculturally dominated, upper-midwest landscapes to better devise plans that adaptively manage our fisheries for the benefit of both the ecosystem and society.

To be successful in addressing the challenges faced by fisheries professionals and related policy makers, we need to better communicate how fish are critical components of aquatic ecosystems and how they provide essential goods and services that generate significant social and economic benefits. All stakeholders must perceive fisheries as socially, politically, biologically and economically valuable resources. Strengthened understanding of the ecosystem conditions required by fish and associated biota, coupled with the assessment of the worth of these fisheries ecosystems should motivate society to ensure benefits from sustainable fisheries and associated aquatic ecosystem services. Additionally, the use marine reserves and aquatic protected areas as a management tool to further encourage sustainability and biodiversity should also be evaluated. Enhanced communication among stakeholders throughout the fisheries supply chain is an essential component to achieving the desired stewardship and fisheries valuation at the local and global level. Furthermore, to mitigate impacts related to environmental change on fisheries ecosystems, the dimensions of the fisheries supply chain, its governance, and its resilience need to be incorporated into adaptive decision-making processes. Ignoring any of the above factors will lead us down an irreversible path of destruction and collapse for many fisheries and fish populations. Only through understanding the requirements and benefits of healthy fish, healthy habitats and healthy people will sustainability of fisheries and aquatic ecosystems be ensured and our economic and social prosperity be enhanced.

The overarching goal of this regional research project will be to determine the factors that facilitate or hinder fisheries sustainability in the United States. More specifically, we will aim to address how climate change, invasive species, land use, surface/groundwater dynamics and governance systems affect fish habitat, communities, and production dynamics in order to conserve and restore sustainable and economically viable aquatic ecosystems and fishery resources.

Related, Current and Previous Work

Below is a sampling of associated research programs that identify the importance of research to sustainable fisheries development and management and would provide the basis for collaborative efforts between and among AES scientists:

(1) TIPPING THE BALANCE: IDENTIFYING THRESHOLD CONDITIONS FOR OHIO'S FISHERIES

Key Contributor: Mazeika Sullivan (Ohio State University)

The Ohio River Basin represents a diverse and productive ecosystem that is ecologically, socially, culturally, and economically vital to the state of Ohio and the central US (Delong 2005, White et al. 2005). The unique physiographic and geologic histories of the region are reflected in the system's rich biodiversity, characterized by the confluence of northern and southern species assemblages and by a suite of federally listed endangered and threatened plants, mussels, fishes, birds, and mammals.

The Ohio section of the Ohio River Basin drains the southern two-thirds of Ohio, an area of intensive agriculture, lumbering, mining, and recreation. Expanding human populations have led to increased development, leading to numerous stressors including rapid land-use change, physical alteration of aquatic habitat, destruction of wetlands, widespread inputs of pollutants, and changes in climate and precipitation (White et al. 2005, Blocksom et al. 2010, Zhang et al. 2010). In many of these watersheds, we may have reached a tipping point, where these factors - alone and in combination - cause an abrupt change in watershed quality, characteristics, and/or function. In river ecosystems there is considerable uncertainty around both the nature and amount of physical change necessary to trigger biotic responses and losses of ecological condition. For instance, land-use changes may precipitate threshold changes in stream ecosystem processes (Young and Huryn 1999, Gessner and Chauvet 2002) and influence river ecosystems at both small and large spatial scales (Richards et al. 1996), thereby reducing their ecological resiliency (e.g., fisheries collapse; Walters et al. 1996). Identifying the natural processes necessary to maintain acceptable ecological conditions (Poff 2002) will likely provide key information in understanding habitat, fisheries, and food-web dynamics in managed riverine landscapes. As such, an integrated understanding of how watershed and landscape drivers interact to regulate ecological condition and processes is critically needed, particularly in rivers where extrinsic factors such as hydrology and geomorphology govern the structure and function of these ecosystems (e.g., Sullivan et al. 2006). Because of these factors, drivers that affect local conditions may operate at a much larger scale: valley, watershed, and geomorphic province (Montgomery and Buffington 1998). Until recently, investigations at these scales were unrealistic. However, the development of GIS, lidar, and other remote sensing technologies now allow data acquisition at scales appropriate to address the complex interaction of ecological drivers in watersheds (e.g., Vierling et al. 2008).

(2) EVALUATION AND SYNTHESIS OF KANSAS FISHERIES RESOURCE QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY IN RESPONSE TO DRIVERS OF ECOSYSTEM CHANGE TO FACILITATE INCORPORATION OF DATA INTO STATE POLICY DECISIONS

Key Contributor: Keith Gido (Kansas State University)

Water extractions in the High Plains aquifer have increased drying in streams and reduced the volume of many storage reservoirs. Moreover, introductions of nonnative species have been shown to be detrimental to established sport fisheries as well as native fish diversity in streams and rivers. State resource agencies are often conflicted with protection of these different resources; particularly if that protection limits the use of other resources by their citizens. A current limitation in assessing the sustainability of fisheries resources in Kansas is a synthesis of major influential factors. In short, there is an imbalance between the data collected and the incorporation of those data into policy decisions. We have identified six major drivers of fisheries resource quality that, if evaluated, would greatly enhance our ability to manage for the sustainability of resources in the region: Land management, Invasive species, Dewatering of aquifers, Fragmentation, Climate change and Water Pollution.

Evidence for the importance of these factors influencing fisheries resources comes from a variety of collaborative research between agency and university personnel. Specifically, we have compiled spatially and temporally extensive databases to evaluate relationships between fisheries resources and environmental conditions. We have developed models to predict species distributions in relation to habitat features of streams (Oakes et al. 2005, Gido et al. 2006) and have identified potential interactions between small stream fish communities and those that occur in large reservoirs (Falke and Gido 2006a,b) and large rivers (Thornbrugh 2010). These studies identified critical habitat needs and constraints of many species within the region. In addition, retrospective analyses identified long-term trends in species distribution patterns, which have highlighted species in need of conservation and documented the spread of invasive species (Gido et al. 2010). Building on these past efforts to include other states will greatly aid in the interpretation of these patterns by expanding our analysis beyond the political boundaries of each state.


(3) FACTORS INFLUENCING RECRUITMENT OF SPORT FISH POPULATIONS IN ILLINOIS

Key Contributor: David H. Wahl (Illinois Natural History Survey, University of Illinois)

A number of sport fish species have poor or inconsistent recruitment that prevent them from meeting angler expectations, reducing the value and importance of these species in the local, state and regional economies. A better understanding of recruitment dynamics and early life history of these species in Illinois aquatic habitats is needed to effectively address these problems and devise sustainable fisheries management programs.

Managers need to know how sport fish species respond to habitat modification, prey and predator alterations, and harvest regulations. While these options may influence the recruitment dynamics of various sport fish species, the relative merits of different management alternatives are not well understood. Physical and biological mechanisms are also important in establishing year class strength and future recruitment to the fishery. To adequately assess the relative roles of these factors and devise effective management programs for the diverse fisheries of the Illinois and the NC region of the AES, large-scale comparative studies are required. Sampling in multiple systems, and across multiple years, latitudes, and states is required to build the databases necessary to understand these species' production dynamics and focused management programs for sustainable populations.


(4) INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC INFLUENCES ON FISH GROWTH RATES: A CASE EXAMPLE USING YELLOW PERCH

Key Contributors: Melissa R. Wuellner, Katie N. Bertrand, and Brian D. S. Graeb (South Dakota State University)

Yellow perch is a popular recreational species that provides commercial fisheries in many waters (Purchase et al. 2005a), and aquaculture interests in yellow perch continue to increase (Malisson 2000; Brown et al. 2006). Variability in life history traits of yellow perch have been identified in the literature, particularly those related to growth (Heath and Roff 1987; Lott et al. 1996). However, most studies evaluating the determinants of growth in yellow perch populations are limited in geographic scope, and relationships in populations detected at smaller scales are often not significant when expanded to larger scales (Purchase et al. 2005a). In addition, most studies examining influences of yellow perch growth focus primarily on extrinsic factors or gender differences; we know of no study that has examined genetic differences among populations with differing growth rates. Understanding genetic variation across the range of yellow perch could provide valuable information for conservation and aquacultural success of the species.

Fish growth is likely influenced by both genetics and the environment to some degree. Results from experiments to date to assess the relative influence of genetics and the environment on fish growth are often conflicting. For example, Silverstein et al. (1999) found differences in growth between two strains of channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus) subjected to the same captive rearing environment and feeding regime. Contrastingly, Aday et al. (2003) found environmental factors and social interactions played a much stronger role than genetics in the growth of two bluegill populations. The variable outcomes of these studies simultaneously underscore the need for further study to understand the relative influence of genetic and environmental factors.

Research on yellow perch growth has focused on the influence of intrinsic (gender) and extrinsic (climate, food, density of all fishes, habitat) factors. Yellow perch display sexually dimorphic differences in growth as female perch typically grow faster than males (Purchase et al. 2005b). Climate-driven water temperatures influence growth of yellow perch. In warmer lakes, yellow perch grew faster at younger ages but achieved smaller maximum sizes than perch in colder lakes (Purchase et al. 2005a). Fast growth of yellow perch has been attributed by some authors to diets dominated by larger macroinvertebrates and zooplankton (Laarman and Schnieder 1972; Lott et al. 1996), while other studies indicated that fish were an important prey for fast growth (e.g., Clady 1974; Hayes and Taylor 1990). In contrast, density of all fish in a community explained differences in yellow perch growth more than prey availability among 12 Québec populations (Boisclair and Leggert 1989). Total phosphorous explained 61% of the variation in age-1 yellow perch growth among 10 Alberta lakes (Abbey and Mackay 1991) and lake size explained significant variation in early growth of perch among 72 Ontario populations (Purchase et al. 2005a).

To date, no study has attempted to examine genetic variation, gender, and environmental factors simultaneously to determine relative influence on yellow perch growth plasticity across large geographic scales. Such information would be useful to understand the influence of environment on yellow perch populations, which could then be used to predict effects of such environmental perturbations as global climate change on perch populations across their range. Results could also benefit yellow perch aquaculture by reducing the time to market size. Finally, assessing the relative influence of genetics and environmental factors will further our understanding variation in life-history strategies of fish populations (Aday et al. 2003)


(5) GENETIC, ECOLOGICAL, AND BEHAVIORAL DETERMINANTS OF LIFE HISTORY VARIATION IN BROOK TROUT (Salvelinus fontinalis)

Key Contributor: Krista Nichols (Purdue University)

Brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) exhibit a diverse array of life history characteristics across their native range in eastern North America (Power 1980). The propensity of brook trout to migrate between streams and the ocean (anadromous) or between streams and large lakes (adfluvial), to maintain residency in streams for their entire life cycle (resident or fluvial), or to live and spawn in lakes (lacustrine) is closely associated with size and timing of maturation. As with many species influenced by anthropogenic disturbances, brook trout populations across their native range have been subject to range contraction and extirpation in many locations (EBJV 2006). In the Laurentian Great Lakes basin, all but the anadromous form of brook trout exist, and the adfluvial and lacustrine life-history types are commonly called coasters for their propensity to shallow near-shore areas. The 'coaster' ecotype, though not unique to Lake Superior, has declined in both abundance and distribution across the Great Lakes. Historically found in Lakes Superior, Huron, and Michigan, very few extant populations supporting this ecotype now exist in Lake Superior (Newman et al. 2003). Even this distribution is drastically reduced from the 119 tributaries to Lake Superior that historically supported coasters (Newman et al. 2003; Newman and Dubois 1996).

Coasters live longer and grow larger than resident brook trout, and their decline has been attributed to overfishing, loss of river spawning and nursery habitat for juveniles, and negative impacts by other non-native, stocked salmonid species (Newman et al. 2003). The genetic and environmental determinants of variation in brook trout life history strategy are poorly understood, and this project seeks to identify those determinants in order to devise adaptive fisheries management programs for sustainable brook trout populations in the future.


(6) COMMUNITY CAPACITY FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT IN NEW YORK'S GREAT LAKES AND MARINE COASTAL AREAS

Key Contributors: Barbara A. Knuth, Nancy Connelly, Carrie Simon, Ingrid Biedron (Cornell University)

New York State recently embarked on an institutional commitment to govern and manage its Great Lakes and marine coastal ecosystems using the principles of ecosystem-based management, codifying this commitment in Environmental Conservation Law, Article 14, the 2006 New York Ocean and Great Lakes Ecosystem Conservation Act. The Act specifies a set of principles to guide the governance of coastal ecosystems, and notes the need for scientific research and information sharing to help inform ecosystem-based management decisions and enhance ecosystem management capabilities. This project provides an opportunity to contribute to the scientific information base called for in the Act. The Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) identified a central research theme focusing on society's balance of competing uses of ecosystems and their services, fosters stewardship of these resource systems, and it creates a governance system to effectively implement Ecosystem-based management (EBM) (SAG 2008). Some specific research priorities identified under this theme (from SAG 2008) included the: development and evaluation of EBM strategies and policy options to resolve conflicts and quantify the economic and social values of different ecosystem goods and services; determination of the appropriate scale(s) for design of governance systems to account for the complexities of the ecosystem and social systems involved; evaluation of the efficacy of institutional and stakeholder partnership models in achieving EMB goals; and the development and evaluation strategies for ecosystem assessment that allow for adaptation, flexibility, and account for uncertainty.

Ecosystem-based management has been an emerging concept, and some would argue a new paradigm, for at least the past decade. EBM has received attention from natural resource and environmental managers, academics, non-government organizations, and different government sectors, but arguably can be traced to a few key policy-level discussions and publications:

- The World Commission on Environment and Development issued its report Our Common Future (WCED 1987), focusing world attention on the need to address ecosystem-level concerns to achieve sustainable development.

- The Committee on Environment and Public Works of the U.S. Senate h eld a workshop and published a report on ecosystem management (CEPW 1994), notably featuring a presentation and chapter by the now-head administrator of NOAA, Jane Lubchenco (Lubchenco 1994).

- A U.S.-based scientific/professional organization, the Ecological Society of America, articulated the scientific basis underlying ecosystem management (Christensen 1996).

Over time, the terminology referring to ecosystem-based management has evolved, reflecting the notion that humans should be able to apply principles based on ecosystem concepts. Thus "ecosystem-based" management refers to approaches reflecting concepts of connectivity, interdependency, relationship, structure, function, temporal and spatial scales, and ecosystem services, with explicit inclusion of humans as part of the ecosystem (e.g., UNEP/GPA 2006). A growing body of work addresses the ecological and technical aspects of ecosystem-based management, with much past fisheries-related ecosystem-based management attention focused on marine systems (e.g., McLeod and Leslie 2009).

Overall, the Committee on International Capacity Building (2007) concluded that the most important factors towards coastal management capacity-building efforts relate to development of leadership and political will, inclusion of targeted populations in decision-making efforts, knowledge transfer within and among communities and other forms of networking and regional cooperation, periodic program assessments, and sustained funding. Rosenberg et al. (2009) suggested a list of factors that relate to the capacity of management agencies and governance organizations to implement EBM successfully, including the fragmentation of institutional arrangements, jurisdictional complexity, linkages among geographic and political scales, coordination among agencies, and use of a participatory learning and decision process. Communities and regions seeking to implement ecosystem-based approaches to management have found that theory does not always translate smoothly into on-the-ground implementation (Arkema et al. 2006, Barnes and McFadden 2008). Progress has been made in New York to propose components of capacity and governance that are required to implement EBM approaches in Great Lakes and marine coastal systems (e.g., Great Lakes Working Group 2008, Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies 2008). These previous efforts provide a foundation from which to build the research tools and specific questions requiring assessment and greater analysis in the context of this project.


(7) PRODUCTION DYNAMICS, GOVERNANCE, AND SUSTAINABILITY OF FISHERIES RESOURCES

Key Contributor: William W. Taylor (Michigan State University)

Our past and ongoing investigations highlight the consequences of globalization on fisheries and aquatic resources and related influences on current and future approaches of fisheries governance systems (Taylor et al. In Press). Previous efforts have been highly collaborative with a variety of institutions and disciplines, and subsequent work will build from these partnerships. Current reviews of the potential for climate change adaptation through fisheries decision support tools (Lynch et al. 2010), the use of landscape ecology to spatially identify anthropogenic factors impacting local fisheries and their foodwebs (Liu and Taylor 2002), and evaluation of existing fisheries management tools (Hedges et al. 2010), demonstrated several opportunities for increased cross-disciplinary research and potential enhancements to existing governance approaches. In order to better manage our fisheries in light of these analyses, it will be critical to further understand the biological limitations to fish production in our waterways while protecting and enhancing key habitats for their growth and survival. Recommendations for governance strategies will maximize novel approaches to achieve these goals.

Objectives

1. Improve understanding of the causes underlying the changes in habitat, such as climate change, invasive species, and land use, and the associated effects on the production and resilience of fisheries and aquatic communities.
   
2. Determine factors driving fish populations' growth, survival and reproduction.
   
3. Improve understanding of the factors underlying public awareness, engagement and public support for fisheries resources, aquatic ecosystems, and fisheries sustainability.
   
4. Compare and evaluate governance systems and management tools regarding their potential to adaptively link ecological, social and political systems for enhanced fisheries sustainability and prosperity.
   

Methods

(1) TIPPING THE BALANCE: IDENTIFYING THRESHOLD CONDITIONS FOR OHIO'S FISHERIES (Related to General Objective #1): The need to indentify thresholds above which ecological processes cease to maintain ecosystem function in the context of priority threats impacting fisheries and aquatic communities - sedimentation, invasive species, loss of floodplain and riparian habitat, and climate change - will be critical for maintaining productive fisheries in Ohio and elsewhere. These watershed stressors suggests that a coordinated landscape-scale effort is necessary to fully address these issues, reverse and prevent further declines in biological resources, and enhance the sustainability of Ohio's watershed ecosystems and their myriad ecosystem services associated with the Ohio River. To do this, the hierarchical linkages among climate change, watershed land use and cover, riparian and floodplain habitat, aquatic habitat (with a particular focus on sedimentation), and riverine diversity, distribution, and relative complexity of riverine food webs will be examined. Remotely-sensed data (including lidar, satellite imagery, aerial photos, and historical maps) will be used in a GIS to uniquely characterize watershed land use and cover and riparian zones. Aquatic habitat and fish-dominated food webs will be field-sampled. Boat electrofishing will be the prominent method used to sample fish (Yoder and Smith 1999), but other supplementary sampling gear (e.g., purse seine, backpack shocker) may be used to ensure a more complete sample depending on the habitats sampled. Additional taxa (insects, macrophytes, plankton, etc.) will be collected to populate food-web characteristics using standard methodologies. Climate and precipitation modeling will be based on the period 1950-2099. Four of the most widely-used climate models include CSIRO-Mk2, ECHAM4, HadCM3 and NCAR-PCM, all of which are available for download from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Data Distribution Center (http://ipcc-ddc.cru.uea.ac.uk) (IPCC 2001). All four of these models have available runs under the A2 greenhouse gas emission scenario (IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenario), which describes a world characterized by steady population growth of 15,000 million people by the end of the 21st century, and a lack of proactive measures undertaken to mitigate increases in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration leading to global warming of 2.7-4.8°C, depending on the GCM used. Although these models are still currently limited in their ability to reproduce rainfall volumes and to simulate the seasonal dynamics of rainfall, the trends they indicate can be used to construct climate scenarios (Ardoin-Bardin et al. 2009). Constructing climate scenarios using the ranges in variation between future climate and baseline periods will help offset current model limitations (IPCC 1999). Using the changes predicted by the HadCM3-A2 model (i.e., time series for rainfall and potential evapotranspiration until the end of the 21st century), we will simulate probable future climatic conditions. Models will be refined with field data including measurements of water depths and local temperature and precipitation. Stable isotope analysis is becoming an increasingly valuable tool in ecological studies (see Thompson et al. 2005). In aquatic studies, applications of stable isotopes allow increased investigation of trophic levels (delta 15N) and diet studies (delta 13C) and, therefore, may be of particular use in deriving food webs (Collier et al. 2002, Hicks et al. 2005). Stable isotope analysis will enable us to characterize the relative trophic position of each species and estimate food chain length and food web complexity. IsoSource mixing models developed by Phillips and Gregg will be used to derive fish diets (2001). Phillips and Gregg's (2001) Iso-Error spreadsheet will be used to obtain 95% confidence intervals for the mixing model estimates. Bayesian mixing models (Moore and Semmens 2008), including Ward et al.'s (2010) "fully Bayesian approach", will also be used to help incorporate uncertainty stemming from isotope data and mixing processes. A variety of multivariate statistical approaches will be considered in developing models relating to the influences of climate, land use, and habitat characteristics on fish-dominated food webs. Bayesian techniques will be used to develop predictive models that forecast threshold changes in fish assemblages and food webs under probable future land use, land cover, and climate scenarios. Structural equation modeling will also be considered to produce models for each study watershed and a global, regional model. SEM has become a powerful tool in examining potential causal pathways among intercorrelated variables and exploring the associations among variables while statistically controlling for other model variables. SEM incorporates estimates of measurement error, negotiates problems associated with multicollinearity, and suggests model improvements in evaluating alternative models (Bollen 1989). Nonparametric changepoint analysis (King et al. 2007, King and Richardson 2003) will be used to target threshold responses in food-web characteristics (e.g., complexity, connectance, linkage, and species properties) as they relate to climatic, land-use, and habitat models. More specifically, nonparametric changepoint analysis (nCPA) is based on the concept that a structural change in an ecosystem may affect both the mean and the variance of an ecological response variable used to represent the change. The changepoint itself is a value that separates the data into two distinct groups with the greatest difference in means and/or variances. The nCPA method uses a bootstrapping technique to estimate a percentile confidence around the observed threshold (i.e., incorporates estimates of uncertainty in the changepoint to assess the risk associated with particular levels of responses to the predictor/s). (2) EVALUATION AND SYNTHESIS OF KANSAS FISHERIES RESOURCE QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY IN RESPONSE TO DRIVERS OF ECOSYSTEM CHANGE TO FACILITATE INCORPORATION OF DATA INTO STATE POLICY DECISIONS (Related to General Objective #1): We propose a collaborative research project between state and federal agencies and university faculty that will enhance our ability to forecast changes to, and measure sustainability of fisheries resources in response to global and regional drivers of ecosystem change. Biological data will be collected through existing monitoring programs with the various land/water management agencies. Environmental data will be obtained from ongoing monitoring programs throughout the region (e.g., land cover maps, stream discharge data). A variety of univariate and multivariate statistical approaches can be used to evaluate associations among these factors and local and regional scale. Syntheses of the principal associations will be the basis for developing tools to be used by managers to identify critical habitat needs for fisheries resources and to plan for their protection, enhancement and restoration. (3) FACTORS INFLUENCING RECRUITMENT OF SPORT FISH POPULATIONS IN ILLINOIS (Related to General Objective #2): Sub-Objective: To identify the ecological causes and mechanisms determining the production and recruitment of sport fish species in Illinois and throughout the North Central region for the development of effective management programs that provide for sustainable fish production and optimal social benefits. We will use a variety of approaches to explore the role of several biotic and abiotic factors in determining recruitment processes across a number of aquatic systems in Illinois. Our approach will incorporate systematic sampling and experimental manipulations, as well as existing Illinois Fisheries Analysis System and creel databases. The study will develop, in conjunction with other AES scientist and land/water management agencies, long-term monitoring designed to identify the timing and causes of year class establishment and important correlates of recruitment. (4) INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC INFLUENCES ON FISH GROWTH RATES: A CASE EXAMPLE USING YELLOW PERCH (Related to General Objective #2): Sub-Objectives: 1) Examine genetic variability of yellow perch across their range, with particular focus on the upper Midwest; and 2) Examine several intrinsic and extrinsic factors that influence whether yellow perch populations exhibit stunted body size. Extant data on yellow perch population characteristics related to growth, survival and reproduction exist for many populations across their native range. We plan to contact potential partners from across this region for this project to seek such data. Ideal candidate populations will include information on growth, gender, size structure, population density, recruitment, age structure, and mortality information for different demes of yellow perch. We will use this information to categorize populations as exhibiting stunted body size or not. Categorizations will be used to identify populations for further study so that both categories of populations will be equally represented in evaluating the influence of genetic structure, gender, and environment on the growth dynamics and sustainability of yellow perch populations. Once these populations have been identified, we will use combinations of simple correlations, meta-analyses, and controlled laboratory experiments to determine the relative influence of genetic variability, gender, and environment on growth of yellow perch. Environmental characteristics to be tested include factors such as climate, food availability, density of predators and competitors, water quality, and lake morphometry. (5) GENETIC, ECOLOGICAL, AND BEHAVIORAL DETERMINANTS OF LIFE HISTORY VARIATION IN BROOK TROUT (Salvelinus fontinalis) (Related to General Objective #2): The approach taken to identify the influence of genetics, environment and their interaction on life history variation within and across populations of brook trout includes a variety of standard fishery methods. These methods include common garden experiments using complex breeding designs of fish to evaluate the heritable genetic variation for traits associated with life history variation (quantitative genetic approaches), as well as genetic and genomic approaches to understand the genes and genetic mechanisms that have been shaped in life history diversification. The findings of our studies go beyond traditional population genetic approaches that serve to delineate population boundaries purely on the basis of markers that reflect demographic history, but serve to identify the genetic determinants associated with life history variation that conservation biologists and management agencies are charged with managing and/or protecting. (6) COMMUNITY CAPACITY FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT IN NEW YORK'S GREAT LAKES AND MARINE COASTAL AREAS (Related to General Objective #3 and General Objective #4): In order to improve our understanding of the factors underlying public awareness, engagement, and public support for fisheries resources, aquatic ecosystems, and fisheries sustainability, we intend to identify factors that prompt communities and/or natural resource management agencies to seek to engage in, and engage others in, ecosystem-based resource management and stewardship, focusing on the Great Lakes and marine regions of New York State. Specifically, we will develop survey instruments that evaluate public awareness, engagement, and communication related to NY Great Lakes and coastal ecosystem-based management. Additionally, we will compare and evaluate governance systems and management tools regarding their potential to adaptively link ecological, social, and political systems for enhanced fisheries sustainability and prosperity. We will identify factors and processes contributing to the capacity to engage in ecosystem-based management in the Great Lakes region and marine coastal areas of New York State. In these regions we will specifically evaluate the success of ecosystem-based management efforts, particularly with regard to social outcomes and governance principles. We will also determine the extent to which ancillary social benefits (e.g., improved communications or relationships) are realized as a result of engagement in ecosystem-based management practices, and how these ancillary benefits might be enhanced the development of governance structures which allow for adaptive management and inclusive decision making. The objectives of our project will be pursued employing a mixed-methods approach, beginning with semi-structured interviews with members (and their designates) of the NY Ocean and Great Lakes Ecosystem Conservation Council. We will continue with semi-structured interviews with agency and other stakeholder contacts recommended to us by Council members. Interview subjects will be selected based on a purposeful snow-ball sampling technique (Patton 2002), also referred to as a name-generator technique (Lin et al. 2001). The purposes of these interviews will be to help identify state-wide, regional, and local issues that are of most concern in reaching the goals of the Act, and also to identify specific cases (communities) for further in-depth study. Capacity-building analysis of case study communities would focus on identifying barriers to, and necessary support structures for, achieving these outcomes, and include analysis of the social networks that contribute to or constrain the capacity for ecosystem-based management. Within each case, we will employ complementary qualitative and quantitative methods, including on-site visits and observation, mail and telephone surveys, individual and small group interviews, and document analysis. Case study research is an approach for examining how and why events occur, and how and why decisions or choices are made, with a deliberate focus on examining the influence of context (Yin 2003). We plan to use a reasoned action approach, specifically the integrative model of behavioral prediction (IM) (Fishbein 2008), to understand the influence of background; beliefs; attitudes, norms, and self-efficacy; and environmental factors, intentions, and skills and abilities on environmental stewardship in each case study community. We anticipate social network analysis theory and associated tools will serve as an appropriate framework for analyzing important factors in the case study communities. (7) PRODUCTION DYNAMICS, GOVERNANCE, AND SUSTAINABILITY OF FISHERIES RESOURCES (Related to General Objective #2 and General Objective #4): We will compare and contrast fisheries management institutions to determine factors necessary for successful interjurisdictional cooperative governance of shared fisheries resources given the impacts associated with climate change and other causes of habitat degradation. To achieve this goal, we will use survey methodology and social network analysis to increase our understanding of institutions' effectiveness and evaluate what contributes to successful governance of shared fish stocks. Furthermore, we will evaluate the dynamics between biological networks and social networks in regards to ecosystem perturbation that result in changes in food web structure, fish population dynamics and trends in fisheries catch. We will compile data using standard methods for quantitative fish collections in cooperation with our State, Federal, and Tribal partners. Fish will be evaluated for growth, abundance, and survival parameters in order to assess the effectiveness of fisheries governance programs and to develop, where needed, alternative management strategies for sustainable fisheries. Collected data will be geospatially referenced and managed to enhance collaborative research. Following data analysis to enhance understanding of fish production dynamics, and the influence of changes in habitat, technologies, and management approaches, we will also study the supply chain of related fisheries products in order to better trace impacts of the global market on the health of local fish stocks and fisheries. Lastly, we will evaluate whether alternative management strategies, such as implementation of dynamic protected areas, have the ability to optimize benefits for society while ensuring the sustainability of the fish populations and their ecosystems. In order to further increase efficiency, transparency, and eliminate duplication of effort, fisheries and climate change projects (for example) and related spatial datasets within the Great Lakes basin can be centralized into a publicly searchable project tracking system. With the database in place, new climate and fisheries-related models, as they become available, can utilize the existing data to make the most accurate projections possible.

Measurement of Progress and Results

Outputs

• SUB-PROJECT (1): Identify current status of riverine fish community structure and function in Ohio River drainages and develop predictive population and habitat models that will allow for managers to quantify threshold levels of environmental change that will trigger drastic losses in the quality and productivity of fisheries and aquatic resources <br>
• SUB-PROJECT (1): Graduate students, peer reviewed manuscripts, management tools for use in adaptive decision management <br>
• SUB-PROJECT (2): Comprehensive databases with biotic (fisheries) and abiotic (habitat) information across the region <br>
• SUB-PROJECT (2): Peer-reviewed manuscripts describing large scale patterns of species and resources <br>
• SUB-PROJECT (2): Graduate student and other project personnel
• SUB-PROJECT (3): Database of potential factors influencing recruitment in sportfish populations;<br> SUB-PROJECT (3): Peer-reviewed manuscripts;<br>SUB-PROJECT (3): Graduate student and other project personnel;<p> SUB-PROJECT (4): Outputs from this project include a comprehensive database on yellow perch populations across a broad geographic range.;<br> SUB-PROJECT (4): This database will include information on growth, genetic variability, gender, and environmental characteristics of the water bodies sampled in this study.; <br> SUB-PROJECT (4): This database could be web-based to allow researchers and stakeholders to access information for the management of yellow perch.; <p> SUB-PROJECT (5): Identification of genes or genetic markers significantly associated with life history variation in brook trout within and among populations of study.; <p> SUB-PROJECT (6): The results of research activities will include analyzed network analysis results, analyzed interview results, and analyzed survey results.; <p> SUB-PROJECT (7): The specific outputs will be the production of graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, undergraduate research internships, publications in peer reviewed journals and books.

Outcomes or Projected Impacts

• SUB-PROJECT (1): Development of adaptive management model that targets ecological thresholds and will allow for more sustainable management of Ohio drainage fisheries in the face of local and regional perturbations in climate and habitat.
• SUB-PROJECT (2): Results from the proposed projects will facilitate management decisions by providing tools (e.g., GIS databases and web-based interfaces) that allow easy access to fisheries resource data.
• SUB-PROJECT (3): Information gathered in this study will provide insight into factors influencing recruitment of a number of important sportfish species in Illinois. Results will provide a more general understanding of the relative roles of physical, biological, and human factors in influencing year class strength. This information will improve our understanding of aquatic systems for improved management. We will work closely and exchange information with fisheries personnel from throughout the North Central United States with the goal of enhancing sustainability of fishery resources of the region.
• SUB-PROJECT (4): End users for this project include fisheries managers and aquaculturists. The project will benefit these groups by providing information on differences in growth across the range of yellow perch and the relative influence of genetics, gender, and environment on growth. Further, understanding the relationship between the environment and yellow perch growth could be used to predict changes in perch dynamics in the face of global climate change.
• SUB-PROJECT (5): The identification of the genetic and environmental variation contributing to life history variation in brook trout will enhance decisions made by resource managers for regulation, restoration, enhancement and protection of these fish resources.
• SUB-PROJECT (6): This project addresses ecosystem-based governance principles and desired outcomes specified in the NY Ocean and Great Lakes Ecosystem Conservation Act, and the related issues of public awareness of and community capacity for engaging in ecosystem-based management. New York communities selected as specific study cases for this project will be the most directly affected through their participation. Through the multi-state nature of the overall project, communities and governance systems within the Great Lakes region beyond New York will benefit through the exchange of ideas, interpretations, and recommendations that will be fostered through these linkages, and will improve their collaborative capacity to achieve EBM goals. <p> The findings from this study will help advance the governance and institutional aspects of ecosystem-based management, in the NY Great Lakes and marine regions but potentially in other sectors as well, in the sense that governance issues explored in this region may be applicable to governance issues in other marine coastal and ocean systems as well. As such, this research will improve understanding of the governance and institutional capacity needed for the types of local and regional collaborations required for environmental stewardship and community vitality related to EBM.; <p> <p> SUB-PROJECT (7): This project aims to improve our understanding of globalization's impact on regional and interjurisdictional fisheries and their ecosystems by investigating the effect of overharvest, habitat degradation, and exotic species introduction on fish production and the fisheries supply chain. Additionally, we will evaluate governance strategies for shared fish stocks and reveal factors resulting in successful management for sustainable fisheries.

Milestones

(1):PING THE BALANCE: IDENTIFYING THRESHOLD CONDITIONS FOR OHIO'S FISHERIES: (2011): Identify and invite participation from potential partners/collaborators and identify potential funding sources. <br> (2012-2013): Collect field data related to fish-dominated food webs and aquatic habitat in representative Ohio drainages. <br> (2014): Generate climate models and characterize watershed land use and cover and riparian zones using remotely sensed data. Build 'threshold' models. <br> (2015): Validate models. Analyze and publish data. <br> (3) FACTORS INFLUENCING RECRUITMENT OF SPORT FISH POPULATIONS IN ILLINOIS: (2011): Identify and request participation from potential partners. <br> (2012): Identify potential funding sources. <br> (2013-17): Collect data on factors influencing recruitment in sportfish populations. <br> (2018): Analyze and publish data. <br> (4) INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC INFLUENCES ON FISH GROWTH RATES: A CASE EXAMPLE USING YELLOW PERCH: (2011): Identify and request participation from potential partners, and identify potential funding sources. <br> (2013): Collect extant data on yellow perch populations and categorize populations as exhibiting stunted body size or not. <br> (2014): Complete genetic analysis and relations of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on yellow perch growth. Conduct common garden experiments. <br> (2015): Analyze and publish data. <br> (5) GENETIC, ECOLOGICAL, AND BEHAVIORAL DETERMINANTS OF LIFE HISTORY VARIATION IN BROOK TROUT (Salvelinus fontinalis): (2011-2013): Identification and study of populations of interest in the U.S. and Canada. <br> (2012-2015): Identification of genetic and environmental determinants of life history. <br> (6) COMMUNITY CAPACITY FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT IN NEW YORK'S GREAT LAKES AND MARINE COASTAL AREAS: (2011- 2012): Case study community observations and visits, in-depth interviews with key informants, document collection and analysis. <br> (2012): Development of case study quantitative research instruments, including mail and telephone surveys. <br> (2012-2013): Implementation of surveys, data collection. <br> (2013): Data analysis, draft report and manuscript preparation. <br> (2013): Sharing of draft reports with stakeholders in case study communities, and with key Council members. <br> (2014): Finalize reports and manuscripts. <br> (7) PRODUCTION DYNAMICS, GOVERNANCE, AND SUSTAINABILITY OF FISHERIES RESOURCES: (2011): Assess the status of fisheries and climate change research in the Great Lakes. <br> (2011-2014): Collect field data evaluating environmental and social resilience in the face of changing demands on fish and fish habitats and analyze related fish population dynamics. <br> (2012-2015): Develop and evaluate feasibility of a decision support tool for fishery harvest management in a changing climate. <br> (2015-2016): Preparation of final project reports and manuscripts. <br>

Projected Participation

View Appendix E: Participation

Outreach Plan

(1) TIPPING THE BALANCE: IDENTIFYING THRESHOLD CONDITIONS FOR OHIO'S FISHERIES:

Ultimately, effective fisheries management will occur through an ecosystem approach that occurs at the interface of human dimensions and science (see Bundy 2008). Results from this project are intended to complement this approach, being anticipated to have direct relevance to the myriad ecosystem services provisioned by the Ohio River Watershed (recreation, economy, water quality, etc).

A high priority of this research is placed on watershed and fisheries education and outreach throughout the state of Ohio. Results will be shared through the preparation of reports to all land management agencies as part of our research permit agreement, including the Ohio Division of Natural Resources and the Ohio Division of Wildlife, Ohio Division of Natural Areas and Preserves, the USDA Forest Service and the National Park Service and presentations to watershed and other local groups. Across the professional scientific research community, results will be presented at professional scientific conferences, including annual meetings of the American Fisheries Society, Ecological Society of America, and the North American Benthological Society. Results will be published in a suite of peer-reviewed journals (e.g., Freshwater Biology, Ecological Applications, Diversity and Distributions, and Ecography).

Potential partners and/or collaborators in this research include, Ohio Division of Natural Resources and the Ohio Division of Wildlife; Ohio River Valley Ecosystem Team; USDA Forest Service and the National Park Service; Ohio Environmental Protection Agency; The Ohio State Imagery Program (OSIP), the Ohio Geographically Referenced Information Program (OGRIP); and the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO). The project is also anticipated to stimulate interaction with other NC_temp1189 participants.

(2) EVALUATION AND SYNTHESIS OF KANSAS FISHERIES RESOURCE QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY IN RESPONSE TO DRIVERS OF ECOSYSTEM CHANGE TO FACILITATE INCORPORATION OF DATA INTO STATE POLICY DECISIONS:

The determination of associations between fisheries resources and key environmental drivers will be shared with numerous scientific and lay audiences. We are particularly focused on sharing our results via refereed publications that can be broadly accessed and used by other scientist and fisheries managers. In addition, our data bases can be integrated into web interfaces that allow managers access to data on species distributions and related environmental parameters. Databases can also be made available via ftp sites that are easily accessed by all interested parties.

(3) FACTORS INFLUENCING RECRUITMENT OF SPORT FISH POPULATIONS IN ILLINOIS:

Results will be made available in refereed publications, and by dissemination to the scientific community at regional, national, and international meetings. Additionally, interactions with management agency professionals and allied NGO's are expected.

(4) INTRINSIC AND EXTRINSIC INFLUENCES ON FISH GROWTH RATES: A CASE EXAMPLE USING YELLOW PERCH:

Results from this study will be disseminated to end users (e.g., fisheries managers, aquaculturists) via refereed publications and a potential public web database. In addition, the project will promote interaction with other NC_temp1189 cooperators and related multistate fisheries organizations, such as the Great Lakes Fishery Commission and the USDA Regional Aquaculture centers.

(5) GENETIC, ECOLOGICAL, AND BEHAVIORAL DETERMINANTS OF LIFE HISTORY VARIATION IN BROOK TROUT (Salvelinus fontinalis):

Results will be made available in refereed publications, and by dissemination to the scientific community at regional, national, and international meetings. Additionally, interaction with management agency professionals and allied NGO's are expected for better understanding of brook trout life history and management.

(6) COMMUNITY CAPACITY FOR ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT IN NEW YORK'S GREAT LAKES AND MARINE COASTAL:

This project is designed to engage stakeholders. The project will be developed in consultation with members of the NY Ocean and Great Lakes Ecosystem Conservation Council. The Council includes members from nine New York State agencies. In addition, agency staff and civic society stakeholders will be engaged in the selection of case study communities, and where appropriate, in reviewing draft conclusions and recommendations arising from our project. Community members in our case study sites, among governance institutions and civic society, will help inform the study design, provide data, and be invited, where appropriate, to help develop or review project conclusions and recommendations.

(7) PRODUCTION DYNAMICS, GOVERNANCE, AND SUSTAINABILITY OF FISHERIES RESOURCES:

Outreach activities will seek to improve the quality and sustainability of human environments and fisheries resources by improving stakeholder knowledge of local and global fisheries ecosystems and their management, thereby enhancing the capacity of stakeholders to make informed decisions. This effort will increase the diversity of perspectives served by the University, thus making management more meaningful and effective for all citizens.

Research activities will evaluate ecosystem goods, governance, and services; the influence of globalization on fisheries sustainability and their ecosystems; and the needs of fisheries stakeholders resulting in new grants, contracts, students and outreach opportunities. The corresponding results will be disseminated via University-derived outlets (i.e., peer reviewed journals and book publications) to the Michigan State University (MSU) community and external parties.

We will also use project deliverables to aid in the development and delivery of credit and non-credit courses, including study abroad programs, seminars, workshops related to fisheries ecology and management, and a fisheries fellows program in concert with partners at local and global levels related to the fisheries supply chain. These will provide a unique learning experience, will advance the knowledge and leadership of students and professionals, and will enhance community-based conservation programs.

Additional outreach duties will also include serving as a liaison between other governmental and non-governmental organizations; linking University programs to the public and fisheries governance organizations; and enhancing Michigan State University's level of interaction and reputation at local, state, national, and international levels.

Organization/Governance

This multistate research project team is currently composed of an Executive Committee, and participating research members. During the first year of the project, the Committee will be reassembled as outlined in the Guidelines for Multistate Research Activities.

Membership is open to AES-affiliated scientists, scientists from other academic institutions across the United States, and those deemed to be able to provide a useful contribution to the proposed research of the committee. For institutions with an AES affiliation, it is preferred that at least one participant from that state's AES be involved. Members are expected to attend the annual planning meetings, contribute to group proposals for high quality extramural funding that is relevant and responsive to society's needs, conduct agreed upon research, share their findings with team members, satisfy all reporting requirements, and maintain communication related to project progress with home institutions and other committee members.

An Executive Committee that fosters collaboration and maintains the integrity of this multistate project is currently composed of two co-chairs, a secretary, and additional members from lead institutions contributing significantly to project development. All members are eligible, but must be nominated by an Executive Committee member and approved by the rest of the Executive Committee. The committee should represent the broad range of geographic distributions, species/habitats encountered, and disciplinary backgrounds engaged in this program. The co-chairs will communicate with the lead administrative advisor regarding meeting times, places, and agenda. Co-chairs will preside over the meetings and are responsible for ensuring that all reporting requirements are satisfied. The secretary will record minutes, perform other duties as needed as determined by the co-chairs, and maintain communication will all committee members and the administrative advisor.

Literature Cited

Abbey, D. H., and W. C. Mackay. 1991. Predicting the growth of age-0 yellow perch populations from measures of whole lake productivity. Freshwater Biology 26:519-525.

Aday, D. D., D. H. Wahl, and D. P. Philipp. 2003. Assessing population-specific and environmental influences on bluegill life histories: a common garden approach. Ecology 84:3370-3375.

Arkema, K.K., S.C. Abramson, and B.M. Dewsbury. 2006. Marine ecosystem-based management: from characterization to implementation. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 4(10):525-532.

Barnes, C. and K.W. McFadden 2008. Marine ecosystem approaches to management: challenges and lessons in the United States. Marine Policy 32: 387-392.

Blocksom, K.A., Walters, D.M., Jicha, T.M., Lazorchak, J.M., Angradi, T.R., and D.W., Bolgrien. 2010. Science of the Total Environment 408: 1180-1189.

Bollen, K. A. 1989. Structural Equations with Latent Variables. Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics, New York, NY, USA.

Boisclair, D., and W. C. Leggett. 1989. Among population variability of fish growth, II. Influence of prey type. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 46:457-467.

Brown, B., H.-P. Wang, L. Li, C. Givens, and G. Wallat. 2007. Yellow perch strain evaluation I: genetic variation of six broodstock populations. Aquaculture 271:142-151.

Bundy, A., R. Chuenpagdee, S. Jentoft, and R. Mahon. 2008. If science is not the answer, what is? An alternative governance model for the world's fisheries. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6:152-155.

Christensen, N.L., A.M. Bartuska, J.H. Brown, S. Carpenter, C. D'Antonio, R. Francis, J.F. Franklin, J.A. MacMahon, R.F. NOss, D.J. Parsons, Ch.H. Peterson, N.G. Turner, and R.G. Woodmansee. 1996. The report of the Ecological Society of America committee on the scientific basis for ecosystem management. Ecological Applications. 6(3):665-691.

Clady, M. D. 1974. Food habits of yellow perch, smallmouth bass and largemouth bass in two unproductive lakes in northern Michigan. American Midland Naturalist 91:453-459.

Collier, K. J., S. Bury, and M. Hibbs. 2002. A stable isotope study of linkages between stream and terrestrial food webs through spider predation. Freshwater Biology 47:1651-1659.

Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate. 1994. Ecosystem management: Status and potential. Proceedings of a workshop by the Congressional Research Service, March 24-25, 1994. 103rd Congress, 2nd Session. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Committee on International Capacity Building for the Protection and Sustainable Use of Oceans and Coasts. 2007. Increasing capacity for stewardship of oceans and coasts: A priority for the 21st century. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

Delong, M.D. 2005. Upper Mississippi River basin. In: Benke A.C, Cushing C.E, editors. Rivers of North America. Burlington, Massachusetts: Elsevier Academic Press. p. 327-73.

EBJV. 2006. Eastern brook trout: status and threats. Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture. pp. 36.

Falke, J.A. and K. B. Gido. 2006a. Effects of reservoir connectivity on stream fish assemblages in the Great Plains. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 63:480-493.

Falke, J.A. and K. B. Gido. 2006b. Spatial effects of reservoirs on stream fish assemblages in the Great Plains, U.S.A. River Research and Applications 22:55-68.

Fishbein, M. 2008. A reasoned action approach to health promotion. Med. Decis. Making. 28:834-844.

Gessner, M. O., and E. Chauvet. 2002. A case for using litter breakdown to assess functional stream integrity. Ecological Applications 12:498-510.

Gido, K.B., J.A. Falke, R.M. Oakes, and K.J. Hase. 2006. Fish-habitat relationships across spatial scales in prairie streams. Hughes, B., P. Seelbach, and L. Wang (eds.) Influences of Landscapes on Stream Habitats and Biological Communities, American Fisheries Society Symposium 48:265-285.

Gido, K.B., W.K. Dodds and M.E. Eberle. 2010. Retrospective analysis of fish community change during a half-century of land-use and streamflow changes. Journal of the North American Benthological Society. 29:970-987.

Great Lakes Working Group. 2008. Draft final report to the New York Ocean and Great Lakes Ecosystem Conservation Council. September 3, 2008. http://www.nyoglecc.org

Grzybowski, M., O. J. Sepulveda-Villet, C. A. Stepien, D. Rosauer, F. Binkowski, R. Klaper, B. Shepherd, and F. Goetz. 2010. Genetic variation of 17 wild yellow perch populations from the Midwest and East Coast analyzed via microsatellites. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 139:270-287.

Hayes, D. B., and W. W. Taylor. 1990. Reproductive strategy in yellow perch (Perca flavescens): effects of diet ontogeny, mortality, and survival costs. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 47:921-927.

Heath, D., and D. A. Roff. 1987. Test of genetic differentiation in growth of stunted and nonstunted populations of yellow perch and pumpkinseed. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 116:98-102.

Hedges, K.J., N.E. Mandrak, M.A. Koops, and O.E. Johannsson. 2010. Great Lakes Aquatic Protected Areas. Great Lakes Fishery Commission Report.

Hicks, J. H., M. S. Wipfli, D. W. Lang, and M. E. Lang. 2005. Marine-derived nitrogen and carbon in freshwater-riparian food webs of the Copper River Delta, southcentral Alaska. Oecologia 144:558-569.

Juda, L. 2003. Changing national approaches to ocean governance: The United States, Canada, and Australia. Ocean Development and International Law. 34:161-187.

King, R. S., and C. J. Richardson. 2003. Integrating bioassessment and ecological risk assessment: An approach to developing numerical water-quality criteria. Environmental Management 31:795-809.

King, R. S., W. V. DeLuca, D. F. Whigham, and P. P. Marra. 2007. Threshold Effects of Coastal Urbanization on Phragmites australis (Common Reed) Abundance and Foliar Nitrogen in Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries and Coasts 30:469-481.

Laarman, P. W., and J. C. Schneider. 1972. The food and feeding habits of the bluegill and yellow perch in lakes with good and poor fishing. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Research and Development Report 279, Ann Arbor.

Leclerc, E., Y. Mailhot, M. Mingelbier, and L. Bernatchez. 2008. The landscape genetics of yellow perch (Perca flavescens) in a large fluvial ecosystem. Molecular Ecology 17:1702-1717.

Lin, N. (2001). Building a network theory of social capital. In N. Lin, K.Cook, & R. Burt (Eds.), Social capital: Theory and research (pp.3-30). Aldine de Gruyter, New York.

Liu, J. and W.W. Taylor, editors. 2002. Integrating Landscape Ecology into Natural Resource Management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

Lott, J. P., D. W. Willis, and D. O. Lucchesi. 1996. Relationships of food habits to yellow perch growth and population structure in South Dakota lakes. Journal of Freshwater Ecology 11:27-37.

Lubchenco, J. 1994. The scientific basis of ecosystem management: framing the context, language and goals. Pages 33-39 in Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate. 1994. Ecosystem management: Status and potential. Proceedings of a workshop by the Congressional Research Service, March 24-25, 1994. 103rd Congress, 2nd Session. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Lynch, A. J., W. W. Taylor, and K. D. Smith. 2010. The Influence of Changing Climate on the Ecology and Management of Great Lakes Fisheries. Journal of Fish Biology. 77: 1964-1982

Malisson, J. A. 2000. A white paper on the status and need of yellow perch aquaculture in the North Carolina regions. North Central Regional Aquaculture Center, Michigan State University, East Lansing.

Malisson, J. A. 2003. A white paper on the status and needs of yellow perch aquaculture in the North Central Region. North Central Regional Aquaculture Center Publication Office, Iowa State University, Ames.

McLeod, K. and Leslie, H. 2009. Ecosystem-based Management for the Oceans. Island Press.

McLeod, K., J. Lubchenco, S.R. Palumbi, and A.A. Rosenberg. 2005. Scientific consensus statement on marine ecosystem-based management. Communication Partnership for Science and the Sea. http://compassonline.org/?q=EBM

Moles, M. D., T. A. Johnston, B. W. Robinson, A. M. Bernard, C. C. Wilson, M. D. Wiegand, and W. C. Leggett. 2010. Reproductive divergence between growth forms of Lake Winnipeg walleye (Sander vitreus). Ecology of Freshwater Fish.

Montgomery, D.R., and J.M. Buffington. 1998. Channel processes, classification, and response. Pages 13-42 in R.J. Naiman and R.E. Bilby. Eds. River Ecology and Management. Springer-Verlag: New York.

Moore, J. W. and B. X. Semmens. 2008. Incorporating uncertainty and prior information into stable isotope mixing models. Ecology Letters 11:470-480.

Newman, L.E., DuBois, R.B., Halpern, T.N., editors. 2003. A brook trout rehabilitation plan for Lake Superior. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Great Lakes Fisheries Commission Miscellaneous Publication 2003-03.

Newman, L.E. and R. B. Dubois. 1996. Status of brook trout in Lake Superior. Prepared for the Lake Superior Technical Committee by the Brook Trout Subcommittee. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Great Lakes Fishery Commission.

NYOGLECC (New York Ocean and Great Lakes Ecosystem Conservation Council). 2009. Our Waters, Our Communities, Our Future. Taking bold action now to achieve long-term sustainability of New York's oceans and Great Lakes. NYOGLECC, Albany, New York. April, 2009. http://www.nyoglecc.org/media/Final_New_York_Ocean_and_Great_Lakes_Report_April_2009.pdf

Oakes, R.M., K. B. Gido, J.A. Falke, J.D. Olden, and B.L. Brock. 2005. Predictive modeling of stream fish assemblages in the Great Plains. Ecology of Freshwater Fishes 14:361-374.

Patton, M.Q. 2002. Qualitative research & evaluation methods. 3rd Edition. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Phillips, D. L. and J. W. Gregg. 2001. Uncertainty in source partitioning using stable isotopes. Oecologia 127:171-179.

Poff, N. L. 2002. Looking for thresholds in coupled biophysical river ecosystems. Workshop on Ecological Thresholds. USEPA, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC.

Power, G. 1980. The brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis. In: Balon EK, editor. Charrs: salmonid fishes of the genus Salvelinus. The Hague: Dr. W. Junk bv Publishers. pp. 141-203.

Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies. 2008. Advancing ecosystem-based management along the coasts of New York: Recommendations from seven regional programs. Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies, Provincetown, MA.

Purchase, C. F., N. C. Collins, G. E. Morgan, and B. J. Shuter. 2005a. Predicting life history traits of yellow perch from environmental characteristics of lakes. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 134:1369-1381.

Purchase, C. F., N. C. Collins, G. E. Morgan, and B. J. Shuter. 2005b. Sex-specific covariation among life-history traits of yellow perch (Perca flavescens). Evolutionary Ecology Research 7:549-566.

Richards, C., L. B. Johnson, and G. E. Host. 1996. Landscape-scale influences on stream habitats and biota. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53(Suppl. 1):295-310.

Romanuk, T.N., Jackson, L.J., Post, J.R., McCauley, E. Martinez, N.D. 2006. The structure of food webs along river networks. Ecography 29:3-10.

Rosenberg, A.A., M.L. Mooney-Seus, I. Kiessling, C.B. Mogensen, R. O'Boyle, and J. Peacey. Chapter 16 in McLeod, K. and Leslie, H. 2009. Ecosystem-based Management for the Oceans. Island Press.

Science Advisory Group (2008). Research and monitoring priorities for ecosystem-based management of New York's Oceans and Great Lakes. http://www.nyoglecc.org

Silverstein, J. T., W. R. Wolters, and M. Holland. 1999. Evidence of differences in growth and food intake regulation in different genetic strains of channel catfish. Journal of Fish Biology 54:607-615.

Sullivan, S. M. P., M. C. Watzin, and W. C. Hession. 2006. Influence of stream geomorphic condition on fish communities in Vermont, USA. Freshwater Biology 51:1811-1826.

Taylor, W. W., A. J. Lynch, and M. G. Schechter, eds. Sustainable Fisheries: Multilevel Approaches to a Global Problem. AFS Press. In Press.

Thornbrugh, D.J. and K.B. Gido. 2010. Influence of spatial positioning within stream networks on fish assemblage structure in the Kansas River basin, USA. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 67: 143-156.

UNEP/GPA (United Nations Environment Programme/Global Programme of Action). 2006. Ecosystem-based Management: Markers for assessing progress. The Hague.

Vierling, K. T., L. A. Vierling, W. A. Gould, Martinuzzi, S., and R. M. Clawges. 2008. Lidar: shedding new light on habitat characterization and modeling. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6:90-98.

Walters, C. J. 1986. Adaptive management of renewable resources. Macmillan, New York, NY, USA.

Wang, H.-P., L. Li, G. Wallat, B. Brown, H. Yao, Z. Gao, L. Tiu, P. O'Bryant, D. Rapp, and R. MacDonald. 2009. Evaluation of relative growth performance and genotype by environment effects for cross-bred yellow perch families reared in communal ponds using DNA parentage analyses. Aquaculture Research 40:1363-1373.

Ward, E. J., B. X. Semmens, and D. E. Schindler. 2010. Including Source Uncertainty and Prior Information in the Analysis of Stable Isotope Mixing Models. Environmental Science & Technology 44:4645-4650.

WECD. 1987. Our common future. World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

White, D. 2005. Johnston K, Miller M. Ohio River Basin. In: Benke AC, Cushing CE, editors. Rivers of North America. Burlington, Massachusetts: Elsevier Academic Press. p. 375-424.

Williams, G. C. 1966. Natural selection, the costs of reproduction, and a refinement of Lack's principle. American Naturalist 100:687-690.

Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd Edition). Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 5. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Yoder, C. O. and M. A. Smith. 1999. Using fish assemblages in a state biological assessment and criteria program: essential concepts and considerations. Pages 17-56 in T. P. Simon, editor. Assessing the sustainability and biological integrity of water resources using fish communities. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.

Young, R. G., and A. D. Huryn. 1999. Effects of land use on stream metabolism and organic matter turnover. Ecological Applications 9:1359-1376.

Zhang, X.B., Wang, J.F., Zwiers, F.W., Groisman, P.Y. 2010. The Influence of Large-Scale Climate Variability on Winter Maximum Daily Precipitation over North America. Journal of Climate 23(11):2902-2915.

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

AL, CA, IL, KS, MD, ME, MI, MN, MS, NC, NE, NY, SC, SD, WV

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

University of Nebraska