Advertisement

Environmental Management

, Volume 59, Issue 1, pp 118–128 | Cite as

Telemetry-Determined Habitat Use Informs Multi-Species Habitat Management in an Urban Harbour

  • Andrew M. RousEmail author
  • Jonathon D. Midwood
  • Lee F.G. Gutowsky
  • Nicolas W.R. Lapointe
  • Rick Portiss
  • Thomas Sciscione
  • Mathew G. Wells
  • Susan E. Doka
  • Steven J. Cooke
Article

Abstract

Widespread human development has led to impairment of freshwater coastal wetlands and embayments, which provide critical and unique habitat for many freshwater fish species. This is particularly evident in the Laurentian Great Lakes, where such habitats have been severely altered over the last century as a result of industrial activities, urbanization, dredging and infilling. In Toronto Harbour, extensive restoration efforts have been directed towards improving the amount and quality of aquatic habitat, especially for fishes. To evaluate the effectiveness of this restoration work, use of the restored area by both target species and the fish community as a whole must be assessed. Individuals from four species (Common Carp, Largemouth Bass, Northern Pike and Yellow Perch) were tagged and tracked continuously for 1 year using an acoustic telemetry array in Toronto Harbour area of Lake Ontario. Daily site fidelity was estimated using a mixed-effects logistic regression model. Daily site fidelity was influenced by habitat restoration and its interactions with species and body size, as well as season and its interactions with species and body size. Daily site fidelity was higher in restored sites compared to non-restored sites for Yellow Perch and Northern Pike, but lower for Largemouth Bass and Common Carp. For all species, daily site fidelity estimates were highest during the summer and lowest during autumn. The approach used here has merit for evaluating restoration success and informing future habitat management activities. Creating diverse habitats that serve multiple functions and species are more desirable than single-function-oriented or single-species-oriented designs.

Keywords

Restoration ecology Habitat restoration Fish habitat management Habitat use Acoustic telemetry in fisheries management Mixed models Great lakes 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the Toronto and Region Conservation staff that helped with our fieldwork (Brian Graham, Adam Weir, Pete Shuttleworth, Bradley Bloemendal and Ross Davidson). Maxime Veilleux and Tyler Peat from Carleton University assisted with fish tagging and receiver downloads. The Great Lakes Fishery Commission and the Great Lakes Acoustic Telemetry Observation System assited with project coordination. The authors also acknowledge the support of Environment Canada and particularly appreciate the efforts of Laud Matos to secure long-term funding for this work to Rick Portiss and Toronto and Region Conservation Authority from the Great Lakes Action Plan.

Funding

Funding for this research was provided by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) in the form of an NSERC Strategic Grant to Mathew G. Wells and Steven J. Cooke and Discovery Grants to Steven J. Cooke and Mathew G. Wells . Steven J. Cooke is further supported by the Canada Research Chairs program. Susan E. Doka is supported by project funds from the Great Lakes Action Plan.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Ahrenstorff TD, Sass GG, Helmus MR (2009) The influence of littoral zone coarse woody habitat on home range size, spatial distribution, and feeding ecology of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides). Hydrobiologia 623:223–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akaike H (1998) Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Parzen E, Tanabe K, Kitagawa G (eds) Selected papers of Hirotugu Akaike. Springer, New York, pp 199–213Google Scholar
  3. Anderson WG, McKinley RS, Colavecchi M (1997) The use of clove oil as an anesthetic for rainbow trout and its effects on swimming performance. North Am J Fish Manage 17:301–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baktoft H, Aarestrup K, Berg S, Boel M, Jacobsen L, Jepsen N, Koed A, Svendsen JC, Skov C (2012) Seasonal and diel effects on the activity of northern pike studied by high-resolution positional telemetry. Ecol Freshwater Fish 21:386–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bauer WF, Radabaugh NB, Brown ML (2009) Diel movement patterns of yellow perch in a simple and a complex lake basin. North Am J Fish Manage 29:64–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernhardt ES et al. (2005) Synthesizing U.S. river restoration efforts. Science 29:636–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Block WM, Franklin AB, Ward JP, Ganey JL, White GC (2001) Design and implementation of monitoring studies to evaluate the success of ecological restoration on wildlife. Restor Ecol 9:293–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bolker BM, Brooks ME, Clark CJ, Geange SW, Poulsen JR, Stevens MHH, White JSS (2009) Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 24:127–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carpenter SR, Stanley EH, Vander Zanden MJ (2011) State of the world’s freshwater ecosystems: physical, chemical, and biological changes. Annu Rev Environ Resour 36:75–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carter MW, Weber MJ, Dettmers JM, Wahl DH (2012) Movement patterns of smallmouth and largemouth bass in and around a Lake Michigan harbour: the importance of water temperature. J Great Lakes Res 38:396–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Casselman JM, Lewis CA (1996) Habitat requirements of northern pike. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 53(Suppl.1):161–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chapman CA, Mackay WC (1984) Direct observation of habitat utilization by northern pike. Copeia 1:255–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chow-Fraser P (2006) Development of the water quality index (WQI) to assess effects of basin-wide land-use alteration on coastal marshes of the Laurentian Great Lakes. In: Simon TP, Stewart PM (eds) Coastal wetlands of the Laurentian Great Lakes: health, habitat and indicators. 1st edn. Authorhouse, Bloomington, IN, pp 137–166Google Scholar
  14. Cooke SJ (2008) Biotelemetry and biologging in endangered species research and animal conservation: relevance to regional, national, and IUCN red list threat assessments. Endanger Species Res 4:165–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cooke SJ, Martins EG, Struthers DP, Gutowsky LFG, Power M, Doka SE, Dettmers JM, Crook DA, Lucas MC, Holbrook CM, Krueger CC (2016) A moving target – incorporating knowledge of the spatial ecology of fish into the assessment and management of freshwater fish populations. Environ Monit Assess 188:239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cortina J, Maestre FT, Vallejo R, Baeza MJ, Valdecantos A, Pérez-Deves M (2006) Ecosystem structure, function, and restoration success: are they related? J Nat Conserv 14:152–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cvetkovic M, Chow-Fraser P (2011) Use of ecological indicators to assess the quality of Great Lakes coastal wetlands. Ecol Indic 11:1609–1622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Diana JS, Mackay WC, Ehrman M (1977) Movements and habitat preferences of northern pike in Lac Ste. Anne, Alberta. Trans Am Fish Soc 106:560–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Donaldson MR, Hinch SG, Suski CD, Fisk AT, Heupel MR, Cooke SJ (2014) Making connections in aquatic ecosystems with acoustic telemetry monitoring. Front Ecol Environ 12:565–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dudgeon D, Arthington AH, Gessner MO, Kawabata Z-I, Knowler DJ, Leveque C, Naiman RJ, Prieur-Richard A-H, Soto D, Stiassny MLJ, Sullivan CA (2006) Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges. Biol Rev 81:163–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Espinoza M, Farrugia TJ, Lowe CG (2011) Habitat use, movements and site fidelity of the gray smooth-hound shark (Mustelus californicus Gill 1863) in a newly restored southern California estuary. J Exp Mar Bio Ecol 401:63–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Farrugia TJ, Espinoza M, Lowe CG (2011) Abundance, habitat use and movement patterns of the shovelnose guitarfish (Rhinobatos productus) in a restored southern California estuary. Mar Freshwater Res 62:648–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Farrugia TJ, Espinoza M, Lowe CG (2014) The fish community of a newly restored southern California estuary: ecological perspective 3 years after restoration. Environ Biol Fish 97:1129–1147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fausch KD, Lyons J, Karr JR, Angermeier PL (1990) Fish communities as indicators of environmental degradation. Am Fish Soc Symp 8:123–144Google Scholar
  25. Gilliam JF, Fraser DF (1987) Habitat selection under predation hazard: test of a model with foraging minnows. Ecology 68:1856–1862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hanson KC, Cooke SJ, Suski CD, Niezgoda G, Phelan FJS, Tinline R, Phillip DP (2007) Assessment of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) behaviour and activity at multiple spatial and temporal scales utilizing a whole-lake telemetry array. Hydrobiologia 582:243–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harris JH (1995) The use of fish in ecological assessments. Aust J Ecol 20:65–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Headrick MR, Carline RF (1993) Restricted summer habitat and growth of northern pike in two Southern Ohio impoundments. Trans Am Fish Soc 122:228–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Herrick JE, Schuman GE, Rango A (2006) Monitoring ecological processes for restoration projects. J Nat Conserv 14:161–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hlevca B, Cooke SJ, Midwood JD, Doka SE, Portiss R, Wells M (2015) Characterization of water temperature variability within a harbour connected to a large lake. J Great Lakes Res 41:1010–1023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Holmlund CM, Hammer M (1999) Ecosystem services generated by fish populations. Ecol Econ 29:253–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hussey NE, Kessel ST, Aarestrup K, Cooke SJ, Cowley PD, Fisk AT, Harcourt RG, Holland KN, Iverson SJ, Kocik JF, Mills Flemming JE, Whoriskey FG (2015) Aquatic animal telemetry: a panoramic window into the underwater world. Science 348:1221–1231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jepsen N, Beck S, Skov C, Koed A (2001) Behavior of pike (Esox Lucius L.) >50 cm in a turbid reservoir and in a clearwater lake. Ecol Freshwater Fish 20:26–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jude DJ, Papas J (1992) Fish utilization of Great Lakes coastal wetlands. J Great Lakes Res 18:651–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Karchesky CM, Bennett DH (2004) Winter habitat use by adult largemouth bass in the Pend Oreille River, Idaho. North Am J Fish Manage 24:577–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kessel ST, Cooke SJ, Heupel MR, Hussey NE, Simpfendorfer CA, Vagle S, Fisk AT (2014) A review of detection range testing in aquatic passive acoustic telemetry studies. Rev Fish Biol Fish 24:199–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kobler A, Klefoth T, Wolter C, Fredrich F, Arlinghaus R (2008) Contrasting pike (Esox lucius L.) movement and habitat choice between summer and winter in a small lake. Hydrobiologia 601:17–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kondolf GM, Vick JC, Ramirez TM (1996) Salmon spawning habitat rehabilitation on the Merced River, California: an evaluation of project planning and performance. Trans Am Fish Soc 125:899–912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lake PS (2001) On the maturing of restoration: linking ecological research and restoration. Ecol Manage Restor 2:110–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lapointe NWR, Thiem JD, Doka SE, Cooke SJ (2013) Opportunities for improving aquatic restoration science and monitoring through the use of animal electronic-tagging technology. BioScience 63:390–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lapointe NWR et al. (2014) Principles for ensuring healthy and productive freshwater ecosystems that support sustainable fisheries. Environ Rev 22:110–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lindell CA (2008) The value of animal behavior in evaluations of restoration success. Restor Ecol 16:197–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lynch AJ, Cooke SJ, Deines A, Bower S, Bunnell DB, Cowx IG, Nguyen VM, Nonher J, Phouthavong K, Riley B, Rogers MW, Taylor WW, Woelmer WM, Youn S, Beard Jr. TD (2016) The social, economic, and ecological importance of inland fishes and fisheries. Environ Rev 24:115–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mazerolle MJ (2015) AICcmodavg: Model selection and multimodel inference based on (Q)AIC(c). R package version 2.0-3. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=AICcmodavg
  45. Mesing CL, Wicker AM (1986) Home Range, Spawning Migrations, and Homing of Radio-Tagged Florida Largemouth Bass in Two Central Florida Lakes. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 115(2):286–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Midwood JDM, Chow-Fraser P (2015) Connecting coastal marshes using movements of resident and migratory fishes. Wetlands 35:69–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Minns CK (2001) Science for freshwater fish habitat management in Canada: current status and future prospects. Aquat Ecosyst Health Manage 4:423–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Moerke AH, Lamberti GA (2003) Responses in fish community structure to restoration of two Indiana streams. North Am J Fish Manage 23:748–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Murphy S, Collins NC, Doka SE, Fryer BJ (2012) Evidence of yellow perch, largemouth bass, and pumpkinseed metapopulations in coastal embayments of Lake Ontario. Environ Biol Fish 95:213–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Newman JA, Caraco T (1987) Foraging, predation hazard and patch use in grey squirrels. Anim Behav 35:1804–1813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Niemi GJ, Kelly JR, Danz NP (2007) Environmental indicators for the coastal region of the North American Great Lakes: introduction and prospectus. J Great Lakes Res 33(Suppl. 3):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Paller MH, Reichert MJM, Dean JM, Seigle JC (2000) Use of fish community data to evaluate restoration success of a riparian stream. Ecol Eng 15:S171–S187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Parkos III JJ, Santucci Jr. VJ, Wahl DH (2003) Effects of adult common carp (Cyprinus carpio) on multiple trophic levels in shallow mesocosms. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 60:182–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Penne CR, Pierce CL (2008) Seasonal distribution, aggregation, and habitat selection of common carp in Clear Lake, Iowa. Trans Am Fish Soc 137:1050–1062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pope KL, Lochmann SE, Young MK (2010) Methods for assessing fish populations. In: Hubert WA, Quist MC (eds) Inland fisheries management in North America, 3rd edn., American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD, p 325–351Google Scholar
  56. Pope KL, Willis DW (1996) Seasonal influences on freshwater fisheries sampling data. Rev Fish Sci 4:57–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Poplar-Jeffers IO, Petty JT, Anderson JT, Kite SJ, Strager MP, Fortney RH (2009) Culvert replacement and stream habitat restoration: implications from brook trout management in and Appalachian watershed, USA. Restor Ecol 17:404–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Radabaugh NB, Bauer WF, Brown ML (2010) A comparison of seasonal movement patterns of yellow perch in simple and complex lake basins. North Am J Fish Manage 30:179–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Randall RG, Bradford MJ, Clark KD, Rice JC (2012) A science-based interpretation of ongoing productivity of commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fisheries. DFO Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Research Document 2012/112 iv + 26 p.Google Scholar
  60. Randall RG, Minns CK, Cairns VW, Moore JE (1996) The relationship between an index of fish production and submerged macrophytes and other habitat features at three littoral areas in the Great Lakes. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 53(Suppl. 1):35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. R Core Team. (2014) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn
  62. Richter BD, Braun DP, Mendelson MA, Master LL (1997) Threats to imperiled freshwater fauna. Conserv Biol 11:1081–1093CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rogers KB, Bergensen EP (1999) Utility of synthetic structures for concentrating adult Northern Pike and Largemouth Bass. North Am J Fish Manage 19:1054–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rous AM, Forrest A, Hart McKittrick E, Letterio G, Roszell J, Wright T, Cooke SJ (2015) Orientation and position of fish affects recovery time from electrosedation. Trans Am Fish Soc 144:820–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ruiz-Jaen MC, Aide TM (2005) Restoration success how is it being measured? Restor Ecol 13:569–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sammons SM, Maceina MJ (2005) Activity patterns of largemouth bass in a subtropical US reservoir. Fish Manage Ecol 12:331–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Simberloff D (1998) Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: is single-species management passé in the landscape era? Biol Conserv 83:247–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Smokorowski KE, Pratt TC (2007) Effect of a change in physical structure and cover on fish and fish habitat in freshwater ecosystems – a review and meta-analysis. Environ Rev 15:15–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Snell, E. A. 1987. Wetland distribution and conservation in southern Ontario. Working paper No. 48. Inland Waters and Land Directorate. Environment Canada: Ottawa, OntarioGoogle Scholar
  70. Stewart GB, Bayliss HR, Showler DA, Sutherland WJ, Pullin AS (2009) Effectiveness of engineered in-stream structure mitigation measures to increase salmonid abundance: a systematic review. Ecol Appl 19:931–941CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Strayer DL, Dudgeon D (2010) Freshwater biodiversity conservation: recent progress and future challenges. J North Am Benthol Soc 29:344–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. TRCA. (2000) Tommy Thompson Park – public urban wilderness: habitat creation and enhancement projects 1995–2000, Toronto, ON, pp 1–46Google Scholar
  73. Trushenski JT, Bowker JD (2012) Effect of voltage and exposure time on fish response to electrosedation. J Fish Wildlife Manage 3:276–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Underwood AJ (1994) On beyond BACI: sampling designs that might reliably detect environmental disturbances. Ecol Appl 4:3–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Vandergoot CS, Murchie KJ, Cooke SJ, Dettmers JM, Bergstedt RA, Fielder DG (2011) Evaluation of two forms of electroanesthesia and carbon dioxide for short-term anesthesia in Walleye. North Am J Fish Manage 31:914–922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Vehananen T, Hyvarinen P, Johansson K, Laaksonen T (2006) Patterns of movement of adult northern pike (Esox lucius L.) in a regulated river. Ecol Freshwater Fish 15:154–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Veilleux MAN (2014) Spatial ecology of fish in Toronto Harbour in response to aquatic habitat enhancement (M.Sc. Thesis). Ottawa, ON, Carleton Univeristy.Google Scholar
  78. Wei A, Chow-Fraser P, Albert D (2004) Influence of shoreline features on fish distribution in the Laurentian Great Lakes. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 61:1113–1123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Whillans TH (1982) Changes in marsh area along the Canadian shore of Lake Ontario. J Great Lakes Res 8:570–577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wickham H (2009) ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wilcox DA, Whillans TH (1999) Techniques for restoration of disturbed coastal wetlands of the Great Lakes. Wetlands 19:835–857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Zuur A, Ieno EN, Walker N, Saveliev AA, Smith GM (2009) Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew M. Rous
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jonathon D. Midwood
    • 1
  • Lee F.G. Gutowsky
    • 1
  • Nicolas W.R. Lapointe
    • 2
  • Rick Portiss
    • 3
  • Thomas Sciscione
    • 3
  • Mathew G. Wells
    • 4
  • Susan E. Doka
    • 5
  • Steven J. Cooke
    • 1
  1. 1.Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology LabCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Canadian Wildlife FederationKanataCanada
  3. 3.Restoration ServicesToronto and Region Conservation AuthorityDownsviewCanada
  4. 4.Environmental Fluid Dynamics LabUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  5. 5.Great Lakes Laboratory for Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesFisheries and Oceans CanadaBurlingtonCanada

Personalised recommendations