Advertisement

Hydrobiologia

, Volume 478, Issue 1–3, pp 205–218 | Cite as

A review of the past and present status of anadromous fish species in the Netherlands: is restocking the Rhine feasible?

  • S.J. de Groot
Article

Abstract

The paper reviews the past, present and future of eight anadromous fish species inhabiting the Lower Rhine (The Netherlands), viz. -sturgeon (Acipenser sturio), whitefish and houting (Coregonus lavaretus, C. oxyrinchus), smelt (Osmerus eperlanus), allis and twaite shad (Alosa alosa, A. fallax), sea trout (Salmo trutta) and salmon (Salmo salar). All species are under threat or became extinct (e.g. sturgeon, allis shad). It is not possible to single out a specific factor for the decline or disappearance. A combination of factors is responsible, as the degradation of the spawning and nursery areas, river correction for shipping, building of sluices and hydropower dams, extraction of sand and gravel and river pollution. The likelihood that a species will return via natural recovery, or restocking is assessed. The return of the sturgeon is unlikely. Present observations of sturgeon can be attributed to releases of unwanted sturgeon hybrids. A natural stock of coregonids in Dutch waters seems not feasible any more due to irreversible habitat degradation. Present day catches originate from German releases. The anadromous smelt, heavily reduced in numbers, still inhabits some of our waters, the non-migratory smelt is still very common. The allis shad is extinct and unlikely to recover. The species never spawned in the Dutch part of the Rhine. Twaite shad, declining in numbers, are still observed in the lower reaches of Rhine and Meuse. Sea trout is presumably still present in the same varying numbers as before. Spawning in our waters has not been documented. The salmon, once fished in large numbers, is now the subject of restocking programmes in Germany. Observations of individuals can partly be attributed to these programmes but also to straying salmon. Restocking programmes should be considerably improved before noticeable success is to be met.

anadromous fish Rhine decline extinction restocking feasibility 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anonymous, 1920. Jaarverslag Visscherij inspectie 1919 (4): 77–81 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  2. Anonymous, 1987. Vervuilde baggerspecie is groot aandachtsgebied van overheid. Land en Water 27: 60–61 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  3. Anonymous, 1994. Sturgeons, urgent action is needed. IUCNVorschlag für die 9 Vertragstaaten konferenz zum Washingtoner Artenschutzübereinkomen-Bundesamt für Naturschutz, 9 August 1994, Bonn: 15pp.Google Scholar
  4. Anonymous, 1998. Vierde Nota Waterhuishouding Regeringsbeslissing Min. Verkeer en Waterstaat, Den Haag: 49–59 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  5. Barannikova, I. A., 1987. Review of sturgeon farming in the Soviet Union. Vopr. Ichthiol. 27 (5): 735–746.Google Scholar
  6. Bardach, J. E. & J. Case, 1965. Sensory capabilities of the modified fins of squirrel hake (Urophycis chuss) and searobins (Prionotus carolinus and P. evolans). Copeia 1965: 194–206.Google Scholar
  7. Bardach, J. E., M. Fujiya & A. Holl, 1965. Detergents: effects on the chemical senses of the fish lctalurus natalis (le Sueur). Science 148: 1605–1607.Google Scholar
  8. Bardach, J. E., M. Fujiya & A. Holl, 1967. Investigations of external chemoreceptors of fishes. In Hayaski, T. (ed.), Olfaction and Taste. 11th. Proc. Sec. Int. Symp. Tokyo, Sept. 1965. Pergamon Press, Oxford: 647–665.Google Scholar
  9. Billard, R., 1995. Elements sur la biologie des esturgeons. Pêche Marit. 74 (1): 33–47.Google Scholar
  10. Birstein, V. J., 1993. Sturgeons and paddlefishes: threatened fishes in need of conservation. Conserv. Biol. 7: 773–787.Google Scholar
  11. Boisneau, P., C. Mennesson-Boisneau & R. Guyomard, 1992. Electrophoretic identity between allis shad, Alosa alosa (L.) and twaite shad, A. fallax (Lacépède). J. Fish Biol. 40: 731–738.Google Scholar
  12. Brinkhuizen, D. C., 1989. Ichthyo-archeologisch onderzoek: methoden en toepassing aan de hand van Romeins vismateriaal uit Velsen (Nederland), PhD Thesis University of Groningen: 312 pp. (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  13. Castelnaud, G. & M. Trouvery, 1984. Premiers résultats de trois années de marquage de l'esturgeon Acipenser sturio dans le bas estuaire de la Gironde. CEMAGREF/AGEDRA, Etude No. 18-Ser. Esturgeon 2: 1–25.Google Scholar
  14. De Groot, S. J., 1989a. Literature survey into the possibility of restocking the River Rhine and its tributaries with Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar). Publs. Reps. Ecol. Rehab. Rivers Rhine and Meuse 11: 1–56.Google Scholar
  15. De Groot, S. J., 1989b. Literature survey into the possibility of restocking the River Rhine and its tributaries with sea trout (Salmo trutta trutta). Reps. Ecol. Rehab. Rivers Rhine and Meuse 12: 1–14.Google Scholar
  16. De Groot, S. J., 1992. Decline and fall of the salmon fisheries in the Netherlands: is restocking the Rhine a reality. Aquaculture. Fish Managem. 23: 253–264.Google Scholar
  17. De Groot, S. J. & H. Nijssen, 1997. The North Sea houting, Coregonus oxyrinchus, back in the Netherlands (Pisces, Salmoniformes, Salmonidae). Bull. Zool. Mus. Univ. Amsterdam 16: 21–24.Google Scholar
  18. De Jonge, V. N. & D. J. de Jong, 2002. Ecological restoration in coastal areas in the Netherlands: concepts, dilemmas and some examples. Hydrobiologia 478/Dev. Hydrobiol. 166: 7–28.Google Scholar
  19. Deelder, C. D. L. & A. H. Huussen Jr., 1973. Opmerkingen betreffende de kuilvisserij op de voormalige Zuiderzee, voornamelijk in de zestiende eeuw. Holland 5(5): 221–242 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  20. Frost, W. E. & M. E. Brown, 1967. The Trout, New Naturalist, vol. 21, London, Collins: 286 pp.Google Scholar
  21. Grøn, P., 1987. Saving the North Sea houting. In: Proc. 5th Int. Wadden Sea Symp. Sept. 29th-Oct. 3rd 1986, Esbjerg, Denmark: 146–159.Google Scholar
  22. Grøn, P., B. Møller. M. B. Nielsen, M. Ejbye-Ernst & L. K. Larsen, 1988. Snaeblen-en truet fiskeart. Ribe Amtsrad, Sonder jylands Amtsrad, Tonder, Ribe: 31 pp.Google Scholar
  23. Gross, M. R., 1998. One species with two biologies: Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in the wild and in aquaculture. Can. J. Fish. aquat. Sci. 55 (supl. 1): 131–144.Google Scholar
  24. Hartgers, E. M., A. D. Buijse & W. Dekker, 1998. Salmonids and other migratory fish in Lake IJsselmeer Publs. Reps. Ecol. Rehab. Rivers Rhine and Meuse 76: 1–41.Google Scholar
  25. Havinga, B., 1928. De spiering in de Zuiderzee. Meded. Zuiderzee Comm. 1: 1–18 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  26. Havinga, B., 1954. Vissen. In: de Beaufort, L. F. (ed.), Veranderingen in de Flora en Fauna van de Zuiderzee (thans IJsselmeer) na afsluiting in 1932. Den Helder, Neth. Zool. Soc.: 253–267 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  27. Hoek, P. P. C., 1893. Ñber die Meerforelle des Rheingebietes. Z. Fisch. 1: 3–20.Google Scholar
  28. Hoek, P. P. C., 1894. De elft op onze rivieren. Meded. Vissch. 1: 49–54, 65–69, 81–86 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  29. Hoek, P. P. C., 1899. Neuere Lachs-und Maifish studien. Tijdschr. Ned. Dierk. Ver. 2 Ser. 6: 156–242.Google Scholar
  30. Hoek, P. P. C., 1910. De achteruitgang der steurvischerij onzer beneden-rivieren. Meded. Vissch. 17: 103–109, 118–124 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  31. Hoek, P. P. C., 1916a. Rapport over de beteekenis der zalmvisscherÿ op de Maas. In Versl. Staatscomm. Zalmvraagstuk 2: 159–172.Google Scholar
  32. Hoek, P. P. C., 1916b. Rapport over den Rÿn als zalmrivier. In versl. Staatscomm. Zalmvraagstuk 2: 173–238.Google Scholar
  33. Holl, A., 1965. Vital staining by trypan blue: its selectivity for olfactory receptor cells of the brown trout bullhead, lctalurus natalis. Stain Technol. 40: 269–273.Google Scholar
  34. Holl, A., E. Schulte & W. Meinel, 1970. Funktionelle Morphologie des Geruchsorgans und Histologie der Kopfanhänge der Nasenmuräne, Rhinomuraena ambonesis (Teleostei, Anguilliformes). Helgoländer. wiss. Meeresunters. 21: 103–125.Google Scholar
  35. ICES, 1999. Report of the Working Group on North Atlantic Salmon. ICES CM 1999/ACFM 14: 1–288.Google Scholar
  36. Jäger, T., 1999. Die Wiedereinbürgerung des Nordseeschnäpels. In: Der Nordseeschnäpel. Offenbach, Verband Deutscher Sportfischer e.V: 3–11.Google Scholar
  37. Jakob, E., 1996. Das Potential des Unteren Niederrheins ab Laichund Bruthabitat des europaïschen Stör Acipenser sturio. Das Land NRW-Landesanstalt für Ökologie, Bodenordnung und Forsten/Landesamt für Agrarordnung NRW, Dezernate für Fischerei, Albaum, Köln: 45 pp.Google Scholar
  38. Kinzelbach, R., 1987. Das ehemalige Vorkommen des Störs, Acipenser sturio (Linnaeus, 1758), im Einzugsgebiet des Rheins (Chondrostei: Acipenseridae). Z. angew. Zool. 74: 167–200.Google Scholar
  39. Larsson, P. O., 1984. Remote straying of salmon (Salmo salar L.) from the Swedish west coast and possible effects on sea ranching operations. Aquaculture 38: 83–87.Google Scholar
  40. Lelek, A., 1987. The Freshwater Fishes of Europe-Vol. 9. Threatened Fishes of Europe, AULA-Verlag, Wiesbaden: 42–45, 58-61.Google Scholar
  41. Lobregt, P. & J. van Os, 1977. De laatste riviervissers, Heerewaarden: 131 pp. (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  42. Mohr, E., 1941. Stint (Osmerus artedi). In Demoll, R. & Maier (eds), Hndb. Binnenfisch. Mitteleuropas: Vol. 3 (7a): 1–11, 504–526.Google Scholar
  43. Mohr, E., 1952. Der Stör: Die neue Brehm-Bücherei. 84. Akad. Verlagsgesellschaft Geest und Portig K.G, Leipzig: 66 pp.Google Scholar
  44. Nienhuis, P. H., A. D. Buijse, R. S. E. W. Leuven, A. J. M. Smits, R. J. W. de Nooij & E. M. Samborska, 2002. Ecological rehabilitation of the lowland basin of the river Rhine (NW Europe). Hydrobiologia 478/Dev. Hydrobiol. 166: 53–72.Google Scholar
  45. Nijssen, H. & S. J. de Groot, 1987. De vissen van Nederland, Kon. Ned. Natuurh. Ver., Publ. 42: 224 pp. (p. 67–68) (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  46. Prummel, W., 1989. Iron Age animal husbandry, hunting, fowling and fishing on Voorne-Putten (the Netherlands) Palaeohistoria 31: 235–265.Google Scholar
  47. Prummel, W., 1991. Kapitel 12-Haus-und Wildtiere, in Starigard/ Oldenburg. In Müller-Wille, M. (ed.), Ein slawischer Herrschersitz des frühen Mittelalters in Ostholstein. Karl Wachholtz Verlag, Neumünster: 299–306.Google Scholar
  48. Rameye, L., A. Kiener, C. P. Spillmann & J. Biousse, 1976. Aspects de la biologie de l'alose du Rhône. Pêche et difficultes croissantes de ses migrations. Bull. Fr. Piscic. 49: 50–76.Google Scholar
  49. Redeke, H. C., 1907. De spiering (Osmerus eperlanus). In Redeke, H. C. (ed.), Rapport over onderzoekingen betreffende de visscherij in de Zuiderzee ingesteld in de jaren 1905 en 1906. Min. Landbouw, Nijverheid en Hand's. Gravenhage: 79–81 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  50. Redeke, H. C., 1914. De spiering en de spieringvisscherij. Meded. Vissch. 21: 51–54, 70–74, 83–85 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  51. Redeke, H. C., 1922. Visschen. In Flora en Fauna der Zuiderzee. Den Helder, Nederlandse Dierkundige Vereeniging: 426–442 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  52. Redeke, H. C., 1927. River pollution and fisheries. Rapp. P.-v. Reun. Cons. perm. int. Explor. Mer 43: 1–50.Google Scholar
  53. Redeke, H. C., 1934. Ñber den Rheinschnäpel, Coregonus oxyrhynchus L. Verh. int. Ver. Limnol. 6: 352–357.Google Scholar
  54. Redeke, H. C., 1938. Uber den Bastard Clupea alosa finta Hoek. Arch. Néerld. Zool. Suppl. 3: 148–158.Google Scholar
  55. Refstie, T. & T. Gjedrem, 1975. Hybrids between Salmonidae species. Hatchability and growth rate in the freshwater period. Aquaculture 6: 333–342.Google Scholar
  56. Reuter, J. H., 1996. Houdt de houting. Visserij-Nieuws 19: 206–210 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  57. Rochard, E, G. Castelnaud & M. Lepage, 1990. Sturgeons (Pisces: Acipenseridae); threats and prospects. J. Fish Biol. 37 (Supplement A): 123–132.Google Scholar
  58. Scheffel, H. J., 1999. Biologie des Nordseeschnäpels. In: Der Nordseeschnäpel. Offenbach, Verband Deutscher Sportfischer e.V.: 12–37.Google Scholar
  59. Schreiber, A., M. Schenk, J. Lehmann & F. J. Stürenberg, 1994. Genetische Untersuchungen anMeerforellen-und Lachswildfängen aus dem Rheinsystem in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Fischer und Teichwirt. 2: 52–53.Google Scholar
  60. Shagaeva, V. G., M. P. Nikolskaya, N. V. Akimova, K. P. Markov & N. G. Nikolskaya, 1993. A study of the early ontogeny of Volga sturgeon (Acipenseridae) subjected to human activity, J. Ichthyol. 33(6): 123–141.Google Scholar
  61. Shearer, W. M., 1955. 'Homing Instinct' in Sea Trout. Nature 176: 171–172.Google Scholar
  62. Staurnes, M., F. Kroglund & B. O. Rosseland, 1996. Water quality requirement of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in water undergoing acidification or liming in Norway. Wat. Air Soil Poll. 85: 347–352.Google Scholar
  63. Steinert, H., 1951. Kaviar in der Fischkinderklinik? Orion 6 (18): 713–716.Google Scholar
  64. Stuart, T. A., 1953. Spawning migration, reproduction and young stages of Loch Trout (Salmo trutta L.) Sci. lnvest. Freshw. Fish. Scot. 5: 1–39.Google Scholar
  65. Svárdson, G. & A. Fagerström, 1982. Adoptive differences in the long-distance migration of some trout (Salmo trutta L.) stocks. lnst. Freshw. Res. Drottningholm Rep. 60: 51–80.Google Scholar
  66. Thorpe, J. E., 1990. Sea trout: an archetypal life history strategy for Salmo trutta L. In Piggins, D. J. & W. M. Shearer (eds), Sea Trout in Scotland. Symp. Scot. Mar. Biol. Ass. Oban, Scotland, June 1987: 1–4.Google Scholar
  67. Van Brummelen, T. C., 1989. Chemicals affecting the spawning migration of anadromous fish by causing avoidance responses or orientational disability, with special reference to concentrations in the River Rhine-Study Institute for Inland Water Management and Waste Water Treatment (BDW/RIZA)-University of Utrecht, Section Aquatic Toxicology: 77 pp.Google Scholar
  68. Van den Ende, W. P., 1847. Eenige bijzonderheden betreffende den spiering op den IJssel. Versl. werkzh. Ver. tot bevord. Inl. Ichthyol. 1: 55–55, 69–76 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  69. Van de Ven, G. P., 1976. Aan de wieg van de Rijkswaterstaat. Wordingsgeschiedenis van het Pannerdens Kanaal. Walburg Pers, Zutphen: 1–438 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  70. Verhey, C. J., 1949. Het voorkomen van de steur (Acipenser sturio L.) in de Nieuwe Merwede tussen 1900 en 1931. De Levende Natuur 52: 152–159 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  71. Verhey, C. J., 1961. De vissen en de visvangst. In Verhey, C. J. (ed.), De Biesbosch, land van het levende water. W.J. Thieme, Zutphen: 142–146; 249–250 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  72. Verhey, C. J., 1963. Het voorkomen van de steur (Acipenser sturio L.) in Nederland na 1931. De levende Natuur 66: 15–16 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  73. Vincent, P. B., 1894. Notes sur l'alose. Bull. Pêche. Marit.: 427–441, 465–477, 525–534.Google Scholar
  74. Volz, J. & S. J. de Groot, 1992. Erster Nachweis des Störs (Acipenser sturio) im niederiändischen Rhein seit 40 Jahren. Fischökologie 6: 3–6.Google Scholar
  75. Youngson, A. F. & I. S. MacLaren, 1998. Relocation of naturally spawned salmonid ova as a countermeasure to patchiness in adult distribution at spawning. Scot. Fish. Res. Rep. 61: 12 pp.Google Scholar
  76. Youngson, A. F. & E. Verspoor, 1998. lnteractions between wild and introduced Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Can. J. Fish. aquat. Sci. 55 (suppl. 1): 153–160.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • S.J. de Groot
    • 1
  1. 1.Netherlands Institute for Fisheries Research (RIVO-DLO)IJmuidenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations