ML070220077

JAFNPP Web Refence - Stewart and Schaner

ML070220077
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	01/01/2002
From:	Schaner T, Stewart T - No Known Affiliation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML070220077 (10)

Text

12 Lake Ontario Salmonid Introductions 1970 to 1999: Stocking, Fishery and Fish Community Influences T. J. Stewart and T. Schaner Introduction were increased. In the following years, activity in the The symposium on Salmonid Communities in recreational fishery greatly expanded. Total annual Oligotrophic Lakes (SCOL-I) (Loftus and Regier expenditures by anglers participating in Lake 1972) provided insights on the stressors acting on Ontarios recreational fisheries were $53 million Great Lakes ecosystem. In 2001, the Great Lakes (Canadian) for Ontario in 1995 (Department of Fishery Commission (GLFC) initiated a second SCOL Fisheries and Oceans 1997) and $71 million (U.S.) for symposium (SCOL-II) to synthesize new knowledge. New York in 1996 (Connelly et al. 1997). In this As part of the synthesis, Great Lakes investigators paper we describe the recent history (post 1970) of submitted various working papers covering a variety salmonid introductions and the offshore boat fishery.

of topics for use at a workshop. This is paper is one We also review and summarize information regarding such contribution and can also be found on the internet major fish community influences of introduced at <http://www.glfc.org/bote/upload/salmonid salmonids in Lake Ontario.

introductionsstewart.doc>. The publication of the complete Lake Ontario SCOL-II synthesis is expected Management of salmonid stocking in 2002.

levels The initial introduction of salmonids into the Great Lakes was an attempt to control nuisance levels of The number of salmonids stocked rapidly alewife but quickly became focused on developing a increased during the 1970s and 1980s (Fig. 1). In the multi-million dollar recreational fishing industry mid-1980s, the state of New York and the province of (OGorman and Stewart 1999). In early 1970s, New Ontario agreed to limit stocking to 8 million salmonids York State and the Province of Ontario began to annually (Kerr and LeTendre 1991) in response to establish recreational fisheries and rehabilitate lake concerns about the sustainability of the high predator trout by accelerating the introductions of lake trout levels, declining alewife, record fishery yields and (Salvelinus namaycush), brown trout (Salmo trutta) , perceived risks to the burgeoning recreational fishery rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), chinook salmon (Kocik and Jones 1999; OGorman and Stewart 1999).

(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), coho salmon In 1992, and again in 1996, joint New York and (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and Atlantic salmon (Salmo Ontario technical syntheses and stakeholder salar). Limited stocking of kokanee salmon consultations resulted in changes to stocking policy (Oncorhynchus nerka), was discontinued in 1973. The (OGorman and Stewart 1999; Stewart et al. 1999).

introductions initially failed to establish significant Stocking levels were reduced to 4.5 million salmonids fisheries due to high parasitic sea lamprey induced in 1996, and have been maintained at between 4 and mortality (Pearce et al. 1980). In the early 1980s, sea 5.5 million annually. In 1999, the percentage of the lamprey were effectively controlled (Christie and total salmonid stocked by species was 39.2% chinook Kolenosky 1980) and the survival of all stocked trout salmon, 18.8% lake trout, 17.2% rainbow trout, 12.2%

and salmon improved. Hatchery programs in both New brown trout, 7.2% coho salmon, and 5.5% Atlantic York and Ontario were expanded and stocking levels salmon.

12.2 9 TOTAL considerable bi-national management attention and 8 Chinook salmon public scrutiny (Kocik and Jones 1999; OGorman and Lake trout Stewart 1999; Stewart et al. 1999). Stocking numbers 7 peaked in 1984 at 4.2 million fish and ranged from Rainbow trout Number stocked (millions) 6 Coho salmon between 3.2 and 3.6 million fish from 1985 to 1992.

Brown trout Chinook salmon stocking was reduced substantially in 5 1994, based on a management review in 1992 Atlantic salmon 4

(OGorman and Stewart 1999), and ranged from 1.5 to 1.7 million fish annually from 1994 to 1996. Due to 3 stakeholder demand, and a second management review 2

(Stewart et al. 1999), stocking was increased slightly in 1997 and has ranged from 2.0 to 2.2 million fish 1 annually from 1997 to 1999.

0 Lake trout 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 The history of Lake Ontario lake trout stocking, FIG. 1. Number of salmonids stocked in Lake Ontario, 1968- rehabilitation, management, and research is well 1999 (excludes fish stocked at a weight < 1 g). documented (Schneider et al. 1983; Elrod et al. 1995; Schneider et al. 1998). Initial efforts at rehabilitation between 1953 and 1964 were abandoned, but renewed Species stocking history after initiation of sea lamprey control in 1971 Chinook salmon (Schneider et al. 1983). Lake trout stocking policy has been directed at meeting management objectives for The resumption of chinook salmon stocking into rehabilitation described in joint New York and Ontario Lake Ontario by New York state in 1969, and by rehabilitation plans (Schneider et al. 1983; Schneider Ontario in 1971, followed a 35-year hiatus (Parsons et al. 1998). Lake trout of nine genetic strains have 1973; Kocik and Jones 1999). Despite early failed been stocked into Lake Ontario since 1972. The strain introductions in Lake Ontario, significant angling composition is dominated by non-Great Lake strains returns from Lake Michigan following introductions of (6 strains), two Lake Superior strains, and a brood Pacific salmon caused renewed interest in the other stock developed from mixed strains of hatchery fish Great Lakes (Kocik and Jones 1999). Chinook salmon that survived to maturity in Lake Ontario (Elrod et al.

was initially not the dominant species stocked (Fig. 1). 1995). Lake trout stocking increased to 1.9 million However, angler preference for the large fast growing fish in 1985, and was maintained above 2.0 million chinook along with lower hatchery production costs fish annually until 1992. Changes to stocking policy to compared to other species, resulted in an increased regulate predation on alewife resulted in reductions in predominance of chinook salmon. By 1982, chinook lake trout stocking in 1993. From 1993 to 1999 salmon dominated the stocking of Lake Ontario stocking of lake trout has ranged from 0.9 to 1.1 salmonids. From 1982 to 1999, they represented million fish annually. Management efforts have between 32 to 54% of the annual stocking. maintained lamprey mortality at low levels, restricted Stocking levels of chinook were influenced by excessive angler or incidental commercial harvests, fisheries management efforts to regulate the level of improved survival by increasing the proportion of predation on alewife. Alewife is the primary prey of Seneca genetic strain, and varied stocking practices to Lake Ontario chinook salmon (Jones et al. 1993). As a improve survival (Elrod et al. 1995; Schneider et al.

result of their high abundance and fast growth, 1998).

chinook salmon account for an estimated two-thirds of the lakewide predator demand for alewives (Jones et Rainbow trout al. 1993). Consequently, management of predator The rainbow trout is unique among the introduced demand required management of chinook salmon salmonids as it represents the earliest to naturalize and stocking levels. As the mainstay of the recreational has the longest history of successful introduction.

fishery and the associated tourism economies, changes Naturalized populations were established in all five to chinook salmon stocking levels were controversial. Great Lakes by the early 1900s (MacCrimmon and Chinook salmon stocking numbers received Gotts 1972, referenced in Kocik and Jones 1999). In Lake Ontario Salmonid Introductions

12.3 Lake Ontario, there were established spawning runs in Atlantic salmon several tributaries by the 1960s (Christie 1973). Differing and changing management objectives Despite the presence of wild runs, rainbow trout and policies among state, provincial, and U.S. Federal stocking accelerated from 107,000 in 1972 to 1.1 agencies has influenced the history of Lake Ontario million by 1980. From 1981 to 1999 annual stocking Atlantic salmon stocking. In the recent past (post has ranged from 570,000 to 1.3 million fish annually 1970), in the province of Ontario, management and representing from 6 to 23% of the total salmonids stocking practices have been directed at investigating stocked. Compared to other introduced salmonids, the feasibility of establishing Atlantic salmon.

rainbow trout stocking numbers have received less Stocking began in Ontario with the stocking of 1,000 scrutiny. Encouragement of wild rainbow trout fall fingerling into Wilmot Creek in 1987. From 1988 production has recently been established as a to 1995 between 28,000 and 76,000 spring yearlings management goal (Stewart et al. 1999), however no and fall fingerlings, were stocked into the Credit specific stocking policies to support this goal have River, Wilmot Creek and the Ganaraska River (1995 been developed. Much of the annual variation is due to only). From 1996-1999, Ontario began to emphasize the stocking of a diversity of life-stage (spring fry stocking, and between 121,000 to 249,000 Atlantic fingerlings, fall fingerlings, and yearlings) and the salmon fry were stocked annually. In the early years, vagaries of the management of hatchery space in a fish from both landlocked and anadromous strains multi-species fish culture program. were stocked. Beginning in 1991, all Atlantic salmon Brown trout stocked by the province of Ontario have been from a genetic strain of anadromous fish from the LeHave Brown trout are native to Europe but have been River, Nova Scotia.

introduced throughout the world (MacCrimmon and Marshall 1968). Self-sustaining stream resident stocks In New York, the Department of Environmental occur in the Lake Ontario watershed but few wild Conservation program evolved from an initial brown trout exist in the main-body of Lake Ontario rehabilitation emphasis beginning in 1983, to an (Bowlby 1991). The stocking of brown trout increased emphasis on the establishment of a trophy accelerated along with other salmonids during the sport fishery (Abraham 1988). Beginning in 1996, the 1970s and 1980s and reached a peak of 0.9 million U.S. Fish and Wild Service initiated limited stocking fish in 1991. From 1992 to 1999 stocking has been to investigate the survival and growth of stocked relatively unchanged, ranging from 585,000 to Atlantic salmon in selected New York tributaries. The 672,000 fish annually. first stockings (post 1970) of Atlantic salmon by New York were in 1983, and from 1983 to 1990 annual Coho salmon stocking numbers ranged from 25-53,000 fish. From Much of the initial excitement and development of 1991 to 1999 stocking increased to between 98,000 salmon fishing can be attributed to introductions of and 302,000 Atlantic salmon yearlings and fingerlings coho salmon (Scott and Crossman 1999; Kocik and annually. New York stocked Atlantic salmon originate Jones 1999). Both New York and Ontarios renewed from four distinct landlocked strains (Little Clear interest in salmonid introductions began with an initial Lake, Grand Lake, Lake Memphremagog, and Sebago stocking of coho salmon in 1968 (New York) and Lake) and one anadromous strain (Penobscot River, 1969 (Ontario). Coho salmon continued to dominate MN).

the province of Ontarios stocking program until 1979.

Total stocking of coho reached its peak in 1988 with Salmonid fisheries the stocking of 879,000 fish. The next largest stocking of coho was in 1992 at 829,000 fish. Cost The salmonid fishery is comprised of several considerations resulted in the discontinuation of coho components: an offshore-boat fishery; a lakeshore stocking by the province of Ontario from 1992 to fishery; and a tributary fishery. The only fishery that 1996. However, because of strong public sentiment the is consistently monitored is the offshore boat fishery, province of Ontario resumed coho stocking in 1997. which is thought to represent one-third to one-half of From 1993 to 1999, the number of coho stocked in the total recreational fishing effort and harvest (Savoie New York and Ontario combined, has ranged from and Bowlby 1991; T. Eckert, personal communication, 196,000 to 360,000 fish annually. New York Department of Environmental Conservation, Cape Vincent, N.Y. 13601).

Lake Ontario Salmonid Introductions

12.4 Total annual fishing effort in the offshore boat 600 5 fishery ranged from 2.2 to 4.4 million angler-hours 500 4 from 1985 to 1995 (Fig. 2), with 70% of the fishery Fishing Effort (x 10 )

6 Harvest (x 103 )

effort occurring in New York waters (Stewart et al. 400 2002). Fishing effort increased over the period from 3 1985 to 1990, but declined to about half the 1990 peak 300 level by 1995 (Fig. 2). Total annual harvest ranged 2 200 from 153 to 548 thousand fish (Fig. 2) with 58% of the Harvest Effort harvest being from New York waters and 42% from 100 1 Ontario (Stewart et al. 2002). Harvest peaked in 1986 and declined thereafter (Fig. 2). 0 0 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 The species composition of the harvest, in order of dominance was chinook salmon, rainbow trout, lake FIG. 2. Total annual fishing effort and harvest of salmonids in the offshore boat-fishery in Lake Ontario for the water of New trout, brown trout and coho salmon (Stewart et al. York and Ontario combined, 1985-1995 (redrawn from table 2002). Atlantic salmon harvest has been limited to in Stewart et al. 2002).

several hundred fish (less than 1% of the total harvest) and will not be considered further. Harvest generally 824 mt in 1995 (Fig. 4). Recreational boat-fishing declined from 1985 to 1995 by 2 to 4-fold for all yields exceeded commercial fishing yields in all years.

species but trends varied somewhat in New York and Ontario (Fig. 3). Chinook salmon harvest declined Examination of long-term commercial catch from a high of 224,000 in 1986 to 53,000 by 1995. statistics has provided much of our understanding of Rainbow trout harvest declined from a high of 120,000 early fish community structure and function (Christie in 1988 to 40,00 fish by 1995. Lake trout harvest 1973). Fishery yields have been used to assess changes declined from a high of 121,000 in 1985 to 28,000 by in system productivity and food-web dynamics 1995. Brown trout harvest declined from a high of (Matuszek 1978; Leach et al. 1987; Loftus et al.

79,000 in 1986 to 28,000 by 1995. Coho salmon 1987). The combined recreational and commercial harvest showed the largest decline from a high of yields from 1985 to 1995, expressed on an area basis 46,000 in 1986 to 6,000 fish by 1995. ranged from 0.7 to 1.8 kg/ha. Recreational fishing yields reported in this study do not include harvests from large unsurveyed shore and tributary fisheries.

Commercial versus recreational Including these fisheries would result in yields at least fishing yields twice as high as those documented. Matuszek (1978)

Historical commercial fisheries in the U. S. and in determined that the maximum sustained average western and central Canada waters relied on stocks of annual yield from historical Lake Ontario commercial ciscoe, lake whitefish, and lake trout. These stocks and fisheries from 1915 to 1929 was 1.25 kg/ha. Clearly, their associated fisheries had collapsed or were greatly current fish yields far exceed historical maximums.

reduced by the mid-1940s. (Christie 1973). In eastern The extremely high yields in the last decade, derived Lake Ontario commercial fisheries persisted. Their primarily from hatchery supported recreational longevity can be attributed to lake whitefish stocks, fisheries, has no historical precedent.

that persisted through the 1950s and by increased reliance on warm-water species (Christie 1973). The Influences of introduced salmonids modern commercial fishery continues to be on the fish community concentrated in the nearshore waters of the northeastern part of Lake Ontario. Harvest is An examination of the fish community influences comprised of 15 to 20 species dominated by warm- of introduced salmonids in Lake Ontario must water species (American eel, walleye, yellow perch, consider various temporal and spatial scales. Spatial brown bullhead) and lake whitefish. scales of influences range from effects of migratory salmonids on individual stream ecology (Kocik and The commercial fishery yielded 1,050 mt of fish in Jones 1999 and references therein), to impacts on 1985, but by 1995 yields had declined to 600 mt (Fig.

unique eco-regions such as the outlet basin of eastern 4). By comparison, yields from the salmonid boat-Lake Ontario (Christie et al. 1987a; Casselman and fishery peaked at 2,600 mt in 1987 and declined to Scott 1992), to whole-lake food-web impacts (Jones et Lake Ontario Salmonid Introductions

12.5 Total Chinook salmon 600 250 Ontario New York Total 500 200 Harvest (x 10 3 ) Harvest (x 10 3 )

400 150 300 100 200 50 100 0 0 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 Rainbow trout Lake trout 140 140 120 120 100 100 Harve st (x 10 3 ) Harve st (x 10 3 )

80 80 60 60 40 40 20 20 0 0 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 Brown trout Coho salmon 90 50 80 45 70 40 35 Harvest (x 10 3 ) Harvest (x 10 3 )

60 30 50 25 40 20 30 15 20 10 10 5 0 0 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 FIG. 3. Total annual Lake Ontario salmonid boat-fishery harvest and annual species-specific harvest for New York and Ontario, 1985-1995 (from Stewart et al. 2002).

Lake Ontario Salmonid Introductions

12.6 Salmon and trout al. 1993; Rand et al. 1994; Rand and Stewart 1998a; boat fishery Rand and Stewart 1998b). Similarly, impacts of 3000 Commercial introduced salmonids have been investigated at the Yield (metric t) 2500 fishery level of individual year-classes (Jones and Stanfield 2000 1993), multi-species trend analysis (Christie et al.

1500 1987a, OGorman et al. 1987) and longer-term impacts of ecosystem and food-web restructuring 1000 (Christie et al. 1987b; Eschenroder and Burnham- 500 Curtis 1999). 0 Despite the diversity of investigations, we believe 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 only two major biotic influences are evident: direct FIG. 4. Lakewide yields from Lake Ontarios New York and and indirect effects on fish communities through Ontario angling boat fishery for salmonids and from Ontarios predation on alewife and smelt; both positive and commercial fishery, 1985-1996. The total boat-angling har-negative influences on the persistence and restoration vest was not measured in 1996.

of native salmonids. A third influence, although not strictly biotic, but a consequence of the stocking of nutrients and zooplankton production (Millard et al.

large numbers of hatchery exotics into a perturbed fish 1996; Rudstam 1996). OGorman and Stewart (1999) community, is the loss of an ecological paradigm on observed that biomass of adult alewife caught in which to base fish community management. bottom trawls was 42% lower from 1990 to 1994 than from 1980 to 1984. In the outlet basin of eastern Lake Predation effects Ontario, bottom trawls catches of alewife and smelt Stocking of salmonids resulted in rapid build-up of have been variable, but declined to extremely low predator levels through the 1970s and early 1980s levels beginning in 1993 (OMNR, unpublished data).

(Fig. 1). Lake-wide harvest rates of chinook salmon, Regional variation in the timing and extent of prey fish rainbow trout, lake trout, brown trout, and coho decline is to be expected and bottom trawling catches salmon in the offshore recreational fishery peaked in can be influenced by changed fish distribution. Less 1985 or 1986 and declined thereafter (Stewart et al. equivocal are whole-lake hydroacoustic estimates, 2002). Index gillnet catches of lake trout in U.S. which demonstrate a severe and persistent decline in waters reached their highest level in 1986 and offshore smelt and alewife numbers throughout the remained high (Elrod et al. 1995). In Canadian waters, 1990s (Fig. 5). We contend that smelt and alewife the build-up of lake trout was 3-4 years later (Elrod et numbers remained low throughout the 1990s due al. 1995) corresponding to a 3-year lag in the initiation primarily to high levels of predation by introduced lake trout stocking by Ontario. salmonids.

Earliest available data suggest that prior to the The suppression of alewife and smelt in Lake build-up of predator levels (i.e. pre-1985), alewife and Ontario during the late 1980s and 1990s was smelt were regulated by intraspecific and interspecific associated with a number of fish community changes.

competitive interactions, cannibalism, and weather The alewife is considered the dominant biotic (Smith 1968; Christie 1973; Christie et al. 1987a; influence on Lake Ontario fish communities OGorman 1974; OGorman et al. 1987; Smith 1995; (OGorman and Stewart 1999; Stewart et al. 1999, and OGorman and Stewart 1999). The increasing reference therein). However, many of the food-web importance of predation by introduced salmonids and interactions attributed to alewife (for example, other piscivores was recognized but it was not predation on fish larvae, competition with other considered to be a dominant influence (Christie et al. planktivores, and their importance in the diet of trout 1987a; OGorman et al. 1987). and salmon) also apply to rainbow smelt (Brooks The diet of salmonids in Lake Ontario is 1968; Christie 1973; Nepszy 1977; Brandt 1986; comprised almost entirely of smelt and alewife (Brandt Loftus and Hulsman 1986). Alewives are ubiquitous in 1986; Rand and Stewart 1998a; Lantry 2001). By the their distribution while rainbow smelt tend to inhabit late 1980s and through the 1990s the impact of deeper and colder water. Both species exhibit large-predation on alewife and smelt became more evident scale seasonal re-distribution between the offshore and (OGorman and Stewart 1999; Casselman and Scott nearshore. The abundance, distribution and ecology of 1992), although it was confounded with declines in these two species result in important interactions with Lake Ontario Salmonid Introductions

12.7 Atlantic salmon due to an inducement of thiamine Alewife deficiency (Fisher et al. 1996; McDonald et al. 1998).

Acoustic estimate (billions) 20 The suppression of alewife by introduced salmonids Summer may increase the diversity of Atlantic salmon and lake 15 Fall trout diets and mitigate the loss of thiamine.

10 Existing rare native brook trout and potentially 5 future stocks of wild Atlantic salmon could be 0 negatively impacted by continued introductions of 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 hatchery salmonids. Kocik and Jones (1999) summarized studies on the potential interactions of introduced Pacific salmonids (rainbow trout, coho salmon, and chinook salmon) on native brook trout Smelt and on the potential for Atlantic salmon restoration.

Acoustic estimate (billions) 25 Studies and field observations indicate that it is 20 possible for native and non-native salmonids to coexist (Kocik and Jones 1999; Scott and Crossman 1999).

15 However, all of the introduced non-native salmonids 10 ` potentially compete for spawning and nursery habitat 5 and food with introduced Atlantic salmon and native 0

brook trout. The high abundance of non-native 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 salmonids, and increasing naturalization, may limit the production of native brook trout and the future extent FIG. 5. Whole-lake acoustic estimates of abundance (number of Atlantic salmon restoration.

of fish) for alewives and smelt in Lake Ontario, 1991-1999.

Historically, four species of deepwater ciscoe, Coregonus nigripinnis, C. reighardi, C. kiyi, and C.

virtually all offshore fish species and many inshore hoyi inhabited Lake Ontario (Christie 1972). The loss fish species. Coincident with the decline of alewife of these species has been attributed to overfishing, and smelt there was an increase in natural reproduction increased abundance of alewives and smelt, and of lake trout, an increase in offshore abundance of predation by sea lampreys (Christie 1973; Smith native three-spine stickleback, a recovery of native 1968). Fish management agencies have proposed the lake whitefish stocks, and some improvements in reintroduction of deepwater ciscoe into Lake Ontario.

native populations of yellow perch, emerald shiner, In Lake Michigan, although cause and effect are and lake herring (Stewart et al. 1999). Other factors debated, bloaters (C. hoyi) increased coincident with a have contributed to these changes, but they are decline in alewife and high levels of introduced consistent with the hypothesis of a relaxation of salmonid abundance (Eck and Wells 1987; Kitchell predation and competition from suppressed and Crowder 1986; Stewart and Ibarra 1991). These populations of alewife and smelt. More recently, the conditions exist in Lake Ontario, likely favour loss of Diporeia (deepwater amphipod) in large successful reintroduction of native deepwater ciscoes, regions of Lake Ontario, coincident with colonization and are dependent on maintaining a high abundance of by dreissenids, has reversed whitefish recovery and introduced salmonids.

may impact other species (Hoyle et al. 1999).

Loss of an ecological paradigm Effects on native salmonids The initial introduction of salmonids into the Great The introduction of hatchery salmonids may Lakes was an attempt to control nuisance levels of enhance restoration of native salmonids. Atlantic alewife but quickly became focused on developing salmon and lake trout were native to Lake Ontario but multi-million dollar recreational fishing industry all native gene pools were lost. Introductions of (OGorman and Stewart 1999). In Lake Ontario, hatchery fish raised from available gene pools are the efforts to rehabilitate lake trout where renewed with only way to re-establish these species. Evidence increased effort to control sea lamprey. The strategy suggests that a diet high in alewives result in early for the rehabilitation of lake trout, and later Atlantic mortality syndrome in the offspring of lake trout and salmon, in Lake Ontario have had strong scientific and Lake Ontario Salmonid Introductions

12.8 ecological underpinnings (Eschenroder et al. 2000; Annual Report, Section 18, Ontario Ministry of Elrod et al. 1995; Ontario Ministry of Natural Natural Resources.

Resources 1995; Schneider et al. 1983; Stanfield et al. CHRISTIE, W.J. 1972. Lake Ontario: effects of 1995). On the other hand, science-based management exploitation, introductions, and eutrophication on of the recreational sport fishery has focused only on the salmonid community. J. Fish. Res. Board Can.

the potential for over-stocking (Jones et al. 1993; 29:913-929 OGorman and Stewart 1999; Stewart et al. 1999).

CHRISTIE, W.J. 1973. A review of the changes in the The potential for a large controlling influence of fish species composition of Lake Ontario. Great piscivores on the structure and function of the Lake Lakes Fish. Comm. Tech. Rep. 23. 66 p.

Ontario fish community was recognized (Christie et al.

1987a; Christie et al. 1987b), but this has yet to CHRISTIE, W.J., AND D.P. KOLENOSKY. 1980.

influence management decision making (Stewart et al. Parasitic phase of the sea lamprey (Petromyzon 1999). The Lake Ontario fish community is largely marinus) in Lake Ontario. Can. J. Fish. Quat. Sci.

comprised of a mix of exotic species that have no 37:2021-2038.

evolutionary sympatry. Additionally, recruitment of CHRISTIE, W.J., K.A. SCOTT, P.G. SLY, AND R.H.

the dominant predator, and the associated top-down STRUSS. 1987a. Recent changes in the aquatic influence on fish communities (Christie et al. 1987a; food web of eastern Lake Ontario. Can. J. Fish.

McQueen et al. 1989) is largely controlled through Aquat. Sci. 44(suppl. 2):37-52.

stocking levels. As a consequence, it is difficult to CHRISTIE, W.J., G.R. SPANLGER, K.H. LOFTUS, apply conventional ecological paradigms or W.L. HARTMAN, P.J. COLBY, M.A. ROSS, descriptions of historical fish community structures to AND D.R. TALHELM. 1987b. A perspective on understand or predict species interrelationships or Great Lakes fish community rehabilitation. Can. J.

equilibrium states (Christie et al. 1987b; Eschenroder Fish. Aquat. Sci. 44 (Suppl. 2): 486-499.

and Burnham-Curtis 1999). This is not only a challenge to fisheries managers but also requires CONNELLY, N.A., T.L. BROWN, AND B.A.

researchers to develop new conceptual models of fish KNUTH. 1997. New York statewide angler survey community structure and function to guide 1996. Report 1: Angler effort and expenditures.

management. NY State Dept. Env. Cons. 107 p.

DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES AND OCEANS.

References 1997. 1995 survey of recreational fishing in Canada: selected results for Great Lakes fishery.

ABRAHAM, W.J. 1988. A draft plan for Atlantic Economic and Policy Analysis Directorate. Dept.

salmon management in New Yorks portion of Fish. Oceans Can. Rep. 154. 122 p.

Lake Ontario, 1990-1995. New York State ECK G.W., AND L. WELLS. 1987. Recent changes Department of Environmental Conservation.

in Lake Michigans fish community and their Albany, NY. 15 pp.

probable causes, with emphasis on the role of BOWLBY, J.N. 1991. Stocking assessment of brown alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus). Can. J. Fish.

trout, rainbow trout, and coho salmon in the boat Aquat. Sci. 44 (Suppl. 2): 53-60.

fishery of western Lake Ontario. In Lake Ontario ELROD, J.H., R. OGORMAN, C.P. SCHNEIDER, Fisheries Unit 1990 Annual Report, LOA 90.1 T. ECKERT, T. SCHANER, J.N. BOWLBY, (Chapter 4). Ontario Ministry of Natural AND L.P. SCHLEEN. 1995. Lake trout Resources.

rehabilitation in Lake Ontario. Journal of Great BRANDT, S.B. 1986. Food of trout and salmon in Lakes Research 21 (Supplement 1):83-107.

Lake Ontario. J. Great Lakes Res. 12: 200-205.

ESCHENRODER, R.L., AND M.K. BURNHAM-BROOKS, J.L. 1968. The effects of prey size CURTIS. 1999. Species succession and selection by lake planktivores. Syst. Zool. 17(3): sustainability of the Great Lakes fish community.

273-291. In "Great Lakes Fisheries Policy and Management:

CASSELMAN, J.M., AND K.A. SCOTT. 1992. Fish A Binational Perspective", ed. W.W. Taylor and community dynamics of the outlet basin of Lake C.P. Ferreri, pp. 141-180. East Lansing, MI:

Ontario. In Lake Ontario Fisheries Unit, 1991 Michigan State University Press Lake Ontario Salmonid Introductions

12.9 ESCHENRODER, R.L., E.J. CROSSMAN, G.K. LEACH, J.H., L.M. DICKIE, B.J. SHUTER, U.

MEFFE, C.H. OLVER, AND E.P. PISTER. 2000. BORGMANN, J. HYMAN, AND W. LYSACK.

Lake trout rehabilitation in the Great Lakes: an 1987. A review of methods for prediction of evolutionary, ecological, and ethical perspective. potential fish production with application to the (submitted) Great Lakes and Lake Winnipeg. Can. J. Fish.

FISHER, J.P., J.D. FITZSIMONS, G.F. COMBS, JR., Aquat. Sci., 44(Suppl.2): 471-485.

AND J.M. SPITSBERGEN. 1996. Naturally LOFTUS, K.H., AND P.F. HULSMAN. 1986.

occurring thiamine deficiency causing Predation on larval whitefish (Coregonus reproduction failure in Finger Lakes Atlantic clupeaformis) and lake herring (C. artedii) by salmon and Great Lakes lake trout. Trans. Am. adult rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax). Can. J.

Fish. Soc. 125: 167-178. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 43: 812-818.

HOYLE, J.A., J.M. CASSELMAN, R. DERMOTT, LOFTUS, D.H., C.H. OLVER, E.H. BROWN, P.J.

AND T. SCHANER. 1999. Changes in lake COLBY, W.L. HARTMAN, AND D.H. SCHUPP.

whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) stocks in 1987. Partioning potential fish yields from the eastern Lake Ontario following Dreissena mussel Great Lakes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 44 invasion. Great Lakes Res. Rev. 4:5-10. (Suppl.2): 417-424.

JONES, M.L., AND L.W. STANFIELD. 1993. LOFTUS, K.H., AND H.A. REGIER. 1972.

Effects of exotic juvenile salmonines on growth Proceedings of the 1971 Symposium on Salmonid and survival of juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo Communities in Oligotrophic Lakes. J. Fish. Res.

salar) in Lake Ontario tributary. Pp. 71-79. In Bd. Canada. 29: 611-986.

Gibson, R.J., and R.E. Cutting, editors. Production MACCRIMMON, H.R., AND B.L. GOTTS. 1972.

of juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, in Rainbow trout in the Great Lakes. Ontario Ministry Natural Waters. National Research Council of of Natural Resources 66 pp.

Canada, Ottawa, No. 118 MACCRIMMON, H.R., AND T.L. MARSHALL.

JONES, M.L., J.F. KOONCE, AND R. O'GORMAN. 1968. World distribution of brown trout, Salmo 1993. Sustainability of hatchery-dependent trutta. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 25(12):2527-2548.

salmonine fisheries in Lake Ontariothe conflict between predator demand and prey supply. Trans. MATUSZEK, J.E. 1978. Empirical predictions of fish Am. Fish. Soc. 122 :1002-1018. yields of large North American lakes. Trans. Am.

Fish. Soc. 107: 385-394.

KERR, S.J., AND G.C. LETENDRE. 1991. The state of the Lake Ontario fish community in 1989. Great MCDONALD G., J.D. FITZSIMONS, AND D.C.

Lakes Fish. Comm. Spec. Pub. 91-3. 38 p. HONEYFIELD, editors 1998. Early life stage mortality syndrome in fishes of the Great Lakes KITCHELL, J.F., AND L.B. CROWDER. 1986. and Baltic Sea. American Fisheries Society, Predator-prey interactions in Lake Michigan: Symposium 21, Bethesda, Maryland.

model predictions and recent dynamics.

Environmental Biology of Fishers 16:205-211. MCQUEEN, D.J., M.R.S. JOHANNES, J.R. POST, T.J. STEWART AND D.R.S. LEAN 1989. Bottom KOCIK, J.E., AND M.L. JONES. 1999. Pacific up and top down impacts on freshwater pelagic salmonines and the Great Lakes Basin. In "Great community structure. Ecol. Mono. 59: 289-309 Lakes Fisheries Policy and Management: A Binational Perspective", ed. W.W. Taylor and C.P. M I L L A R D , E . S . , D . D . MYLES, O.E.

Ferreri, pp. 455-488. East Lansing, MI: Michigan JOHANNSSON, AND K.M. RALPH. 1996.

State University Press Phytoplankton photosynthesis at two index stations in Lake Ontario 1987-1992: Assessment of the LANTRY, J.R. 2001. Spatial and temporal dynamics long-term response to phosphorus control. Can. J.

of predation by Lake Ontario trout and salmon. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 53: 1092-1111.

MSc thesis, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NEPSZY, S.J. 1977. Changes in percid populations N.Y. 235 pg. and species interactions in Lake Erie. J. Fish. Res.

Board Can. 34: 1861-1868.

Lake Ontario Salmonid Introductions

12.10 OGORMAN, R., R.A. BERGSEDT AND T.H. Ontario Fisheries Unit 1990 Annual Report, ECKERT 1987. Prey fish dynamics and salmonine LOA 91.1 Ontario Ministry of Natural predator growth in Lake Ontario, 1978-84. Can. J. Resources, Picton, Ontario.

Fish. Aquat. Sci. 44: 390-403. SCHNEIDER, C.P., D.P. KOLENOSKY, AND D.

O'GORMAN, J. 1974. Predation of rainbow smelt B. GOLDTHWAITE. 1983. A joint plan for the (Osmerus mordax) on young-of-the-year alewife rehabilitation of lake trout in Lake Ontario. Great (Alosa pseudoharengus) in Great Lakes. The Lakes Fishery Commission, Ann Arbor, Progressive Fish-Culturist. 36:223-224. Michigan.

O'GORMAN, R., AND T.J. STEWART. 1999. SCHNEIDER, C.P., T. SCHANER, S.D. ORSATTI, Ascent, dominance, and decline of the alewife in S. LARY, AND D. BUSCH. 1998. A the Great Lakes: Food web interactions and management strategy for Lake Ontario lake trout.

management strategies. In "Great Lakes Fisheries Great Lakes Fish. Comm. 23 p.

Policy and Management: A Binational SCOTT, W.B., AND E.J. CROSSMAN. 1999.

Perspective", ed. W.W. Taylor and C.P. Ferreri, Freshwater Fishes of Canada. Galt House pp. 489-514. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State Publications, Oakville, Ontario. 966 p.

University Press.

SMITH, S.H. 1968. Species succession and fishery ONTARIO MINISTRY OF NATURAL exploitation in the Great Lakes. J. Fish. Res.

RESOURCES. 1995. An Atlantic salmon Board Can. 25(4): 667-693.

restoration plan for Lake Ontario. 18 p.

_____. 1995. Early changes in the fish community of PARSONS, J.W, 1973. Histroy of salmon in the Great Lake Ontario. Great Lakes Fish. Comm. Tech.

Lakes, 1850-1970. Technical Papers of the Bureau Rep. 60. 38 p.

of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife 68:80 pp.

STANFIELD, L.S., M.L. JONES, AND J.N.

PEARCE, W.A., R.A. BRAEM, S.M. DUSTIN, AND BOWLBY. 1995. A conceptual framework for J.J. TIBBLES. 1980. Sea lamprey (Petromyzon Atlantic salmon restoration in Lake Ontario.

marinus) in the Lower Great Lakes. Can. J. Fish. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Picton, Aquat. Sci. 37: 1802-1810 Ontario.

RAND, P.S., B.F. LANTRY, R. O'GORMAN, R.W. STEWART, D.J., AND M. IBARRA. 1991.

OWENS, AND D.J. STEWART. 1994. Energy Predation and production by salmonine fishes in density and size of pelagic prey fishes in Lake Lake Michigan, 1978-88. Can. J. Fish. Aquat.

Ontario, 1978-1990implications for salmonine Sci.. 48: 909-922.

energetics. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 123: 519-534.

STEWART, T.J., B.E. LANGE, S.D. ORSATTI, C.

RAND, P.S., AND D.J. STEWART. 1998a. Dynamics P. SCHNEIDER, A. MATHERS, AND M.E.

of salmonine diets and foraging in Lake Ontario, DANIELS 1999. Fish-community objectives for 1983-1993: a test of a bioenergetic model Lake Ontario. Great Lakes Fish. Comm. Spec.

prediction. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 55:307-317. Pub. 99-1 56 p.

RAND, P.S., AND D.J. STEWART. 1998b. Prey fish STEWART, T.J., J.N. BOWLBY, M. RAWSON, exploitation, salmonine production, and pelagic AND T.H. ECKERT. 2002 The recreational boat food web efficiency in Lake Ontario. Can. J. Fish. fishery for salmonids in Lake Ontario 1985-Aquat. Sci. 55:318-327 1995. State of Lake Ontario (SOLO) - Past, RUDSTAM, L. 1996 [ED.]. A review of the current Present, and Future, pp 000-000 (accepted for status of Lake Ontario's pelagic fish community. publication) Edited by M. Munawar, T. Edsall &

Report of the 1996 Lake Ontario technical panel. I.F. Munawar. Ecovision World Monograph Great Lakes Res. Rev. Vol. 2 (2): 4-10. Series, Backuys Publishers, Leiden, The SAVOIE, P.J., AND J.N. BOWLBY. 1991. Estimates Netherlands of the total fish harvest in the Ontario waters of Lake Ontario during 1989. p. 8.1-8.4 In Lake Lake Ontario Salmonid Introductions