A moving target—incorporating knowledge of the spatial ecology of fish into the assessment and management of freshwater fish populations

Freshwater fish move vertically and horizontally through the aquatic landscape for a variety of reasons, such as to find and exploit patchy resources or to locate essential habitats (e.g., for spawning). Inherent challenges exist with the assessment of fish populations because they are moving targets. We submit that quantifying and describing the spatial ecology of fish and their habitat is an important component of freshwater fishery assessment and management. With a growing number of tools available for studying the spatial ecology of fishes (e.g., telemetry, population genetics, hydroacoustics, otolith microchemistry, stable isotope analysis), new knowledge can now be generated and incorporated into biological assessment and fishery management. For example, knowing when, where, and how to deploy assessment gears is essential to inform, refine, or calibrate assessment protocols. Such information is also useful for quantifying or avoiding bycatch of imperiled species. Knowledge of habitat connectivity and usage can identify critically important migration corridors and habitats and can be used to improve our understanding of variables that influence spatial structuring of fish populations. Similarly, demographic processes are partly driven by the behavior of fish and mediated by environmental drivers. Information on these processes is critical to the development and application of realistic population dynamics models. Collectively, biological assessment, when informed by knowledge of spatial ecology, can provide managers with the ability to understand how and when fish and their habitats may be exposed to different threats. Naturally, this knowledge helps to better evaluate or develop strategies to protect the long-term viability of fishery production. Failure to understand the spatial ecology of fishes and to incorporate spatiotemporal data can bias population assessments and forecasts and potentially lead to ineffective or counterproductive management actions.     

Advantages of Geographically Weighted Regression for Modeling Benthic Substrate in Two Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Streams

Stream habitat assessments are commonplace in fish management, and often involve nonspatial analysis methods for quantifying or predicting habitat, such as ordinary least squares regression (OLS). Spatial relationships, however, often exist among stream habitat variables. For example, water depth, water velocity, and benthic substrate sizes within streams are often spatially correlated and may exhibit spatial nonstationarity or inconsistency in geographic space. Thus, analysis methods should address spatial relationships within habitat datasets. In this study, OLS and a recently developed method, geographically weighted regression (GWR), were used to model benthic substrate from water depth and water velocity data at two stream sites within the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. For data collection, each site was represented by a grid of 0.1 m² cells, where actual values of water depth, water velocity, and benthic substrate class were measured for each cell. Accuracies of regressed substrate class data by OLS and GWR methods were calculated by comparing maps, parameter estimates, and determination coefficient r ². For analysis of data from both sites, Akaike’s Information Criterion corrected for sample size indicated the best approximating model for the data resulted from GWR and not from OLS. Adjusted r ² values also supported GWR as a better approach than OLS for prediction of substrate. This study supports GWR (a spatial analysis approach) over nonspatial OLS methods for prediction of habitat for stream habitat assessments.     

Soil criteria to protect terrestrial wildlife and open-range livestock from metal toxicity at mining sites

Thousands of hard rock mines exist in the western USA and in other parts of the world as a result of historic and current gold, silver, lead, and mercury mining. Many of these sites in the USA are on public lands. Typical mine waste associated with these sites are tailings and waste rock dumps that may be used by wildlife and open-range livestock. This report provides wildlife screening criteria levels for metals in soil and mine waste to evaluate risk and to determine the need for site-specific risk assessment, remediation, or a change in management practices. The screening levels are calculated from toxicity reference values based on maximum tolerable levels of metals in feed, on soil and plant ingestion rates, and on soil to plant uptake factors for a variety of receptors. The metals chosen for this report are common toxic metals found at mining sites: arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, and zinc. The resulting soil screening values are well above those developed by the US Environmental Protection Agency. The difference in values was mainly a result of using toxicity reference values that were more specific to the receptors addressed rather than the most sensitive receptor.