Anthropogenic stream alteration: Effects on brown trout habitat behavior and physiology

T.J. Ross, Bill Fisher and Paul Bowser Cornell University Barry Baldigo U.S. Geological Survey

ANTHROPOGENIC STREAM ALTERATION

Human-induced changes to a stream or river ecosystem.

ANTHROPOGENIC STREAM ALTERATION

Human-induced change(s) to a stream or river ecosystem.

ANTHROPOGENIC STREAM ALTERATION

Dams Road-building
Culverts Diversions

ANTHROPOGENIC STREAM ALTERATION

Dams Roads
Culverts Diversions

ANTHROPOGENIC STREAM ALTERATION

Dams Roads
Culverts Diversions

ANTHROPOGENIC STREAM ALTERATION

Dams Roads
Culverts Diversions

BACKGROUND
Shandaken Tunnel

Esopus Creek

CCES 2007

BACKGROUND
Shandaken Tunnel

BACKGROUND
Shandaken Tunnel
Upstream segment

BACKGROUND
Shandaken Tunnel
Upstream segment Downstream segment

BACKGROUND
Shandaken Tunnel
Upstream segment Downstream segment

Segment Upstream Downstream

Depth (m) Mean SD 0.33 0.2) 0.48 0.15

Width (m) Mean SD 21.13 14.35 31.42 12.87

Velocity (m/s) Mean SD 0.62 0.35 1.19 0.51

Temperature (C) Mean SD 23.82 0.76 19.49 0.52

Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 0.54 0.35 6.17 1.07

BACKGROUND
Shandaken Tunnel
Upstream segment Downstream segment

Segment Upstream Downstream

Depth (m) Mean SD 0.33 0.2) 0.48 0.15

Width (m) Mean SD 21.13 14.35 31.42 12.87

Velocity (m/s) Mean SD 0.62 0.35 1.19 0.51

Temperature (C) Mean SD 23.82 0.76 19.49 0.52

Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 0.54 0.35 6.17 1.07

BACKGROUND
Shandaken Tunnel
Upstream segment Downstream segment

Segment Upstream Downstream

Depth (m) Mean SD 0.33 0.2) 0.48 0.15

Width (m) Mean SD 21.13 14.35 31.42 12.87

Velocity (m/s) Mean SD 0.62 0.35 1.19 0.51

Temperature (C) Mean SD 23.82 0.76 19.49 0.52

Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 0.54 0.35 6.17 1.07

BACKGROUND
Shandaken Tunnel
Upstream segment Downstream segment

Segment Upstream Downstream

Depth (m) Mean SD 0.33 0.2) 0.48 0.15

Width (m) Mean SD 21.13 14.35 31.42 12.87

Velocity (m/s) Mean SD 0.62 0.35 1.19 0.51

Temperature (C) Mean SD 23.82 0.76 19.49 0.52

Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 0.54 0.35 6.17 1.07

BACKGROUND
Shandaken Tunnel
Upstream segment Downstream segment

Segment Upstream Downstream

Depth (m) Mean SD 0.33 0.2) 0.48 0.15

Width (m) Mean SD 21.13 14.35 31.42 12.87

Velocity (m/s) Mean SD 0.62 0.35 1.19 0.51

Temperature (C) Mean SD 23.82 0.76 19.49 0.52

Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 0.54 0.35 6.17 1.07

BACKGROUND
Shandaken Tunnel
Upstream segment Downstream segment

Segment Upstream Downstream

Depth (m) Mean SD 0.33 0.2) 0.48 0.15

Width (m) Mean SD 21.13 14.35 31.42 12.87

Velocity (m/s) Mean SD 0.62 0.35 1.19 0.51

Temperature (C) Mean SD 23.82 0.76 19.49 0.52

Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 0.54 0.35 6.17 1.07

ISSUE: ALTERED HABITAT CONDITIONS

Angler concerns
Reports of decreased catch Fears for health of trout populations

Manager responses
Thermal benefits

2001 Civil Suit

TU vs. NYCDEP

Esopus Creek at Shandaken Tunnel

Initiation of current project and companion studies

Brown trout

ISSUE: ALTERED HABITAT CONDITIONS

Angler concerns
Reports of decreased catch Fears for health of trout populations

Manager responses
Thermal benefits

2001 Civil Suit

TU vs. NYCDEP

Esopus Creek at Shandaken Tunnel

Initiation of current project and companion studies

Brown trout

ISSUE: ALTERED HABITAT CONDITIONS

Angler concerns
Reports of decreased catch Fears for health of trout populations

Manager responses
Thermal benefits

2001 Civil Suit

TU vs. NYCDEP

Esopus Creek at Shandaken Tunnel

Initiation of current project and companion studies

Brown trout

RESEARCH QUESTION
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting Upper Esopus Creek brown trout populations?
Assumption: differences in stream habitat should affect trout
Behavior Physiology

RESEARCH QUESTION
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting Upper Esopus Creek brown trout populations?
Must first understand the effects of altered:
Temperature Turbidity Flow

RESEARCH QUESTION
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting Upper Esopus Creek brown trout populations?
Must first understand the effects of altered:
Temperature Turbidity Flow

RESEARCH QUESTION
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting Upper Esopus Creek brown trout populations?
Must first understand the effects of altered:
Temperature Turbidity Flow

RESEARCH QUESTION
Temperature
Optimal: 12-19C Effects of above-optimal temperatures:
Decreased movement Seek thermal refuge habitats Reduced foraging, growth and physiological condition Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Temperature
Optimal: 12-19C Effects of above-optimal temperatures:
Decreased movement Seek thermal refuge habitats Reduced foraging, growth and physiological condition Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Temperature
Optimal: 12-19C Effects of above-optimal temperatures:
Decreased movement Increased reliance on thermal refuge habitats Reduced foraging, growth and physiological condition Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Temperature
Optimal: 12-19C Effects of above-optimal temperatures:
Decreased movement Increased reliance on thermal refuge habitats Reduced foraging, growth and physiological condition Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Temperature
Optimal: 12-19C Effects of above-optimal temperatures:
Decreased movement Increased reliance on thermal refuge habitats Reduced foraging, growth and physiological condition Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Turbidity
Effects of elevated turbidity
Increased activity and energy expenditure Shift from drift to active-search foraging Reduced prey detection and foraging success Impaired physiological gill function Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Turbidity
Effects of elevated turbidity
Increased activity and energy expenditure Shift from drift to active-search foraging Reduced prey detection and foraging success Impaired physiological gill function Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Turbidity
Effects of elevated turbidity
Increased activity and energy expenditure Shift from drift to active-search foraging Reduced prey detection and foraging success Impaired physiological gill function Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Turbidity
Effects of elevated turbidity
Increased activity and energy expenditure Shift from drift to active-search foraging Reduced prey detection and foraging success Impaired physiological gill function Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Turbidity
Effects of elevated turbidity
Increased activity and energy expenditure Shift from drift to active-search foraging Reduced prey detection and foraging success Reduced physiological condition Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Turbidity
Effects of elevated turbidity
Increased activity and energy expenditure Shift from drift to active-search foraging Reduced prey detection and foraging success Reduced physiological condition Ultimately reduced survival

RESEARCH QUESTION
Flow
Effects of elevated flow:
Increased movement and energetic expenditure Increased growth Altered behavior and distribution Altered availability and use of habitat

RESEARCH QUESTION
Flow
Effects of elevated flow:
Increased movement and energetic expenditure Increased growth Altered behavior and distribution Altered availability and use of habitat

RESEARCH QUESTION
Flow
Effects of elevated flow:
Increased movement and energetic expenditure Increased growth Altered behavior and distribution Altered availability and use of habitat

RESEARCH QUESTION
Flow
Effects of elevated flow:
Increased movement and energetic expenditure Increased growth Altered behavior and distribution Altered availability and use of habitat

RESEARCH QUESTION
Flow
Effects of elevated flow:
Increased movement and energetic expenditure Increased growth Altered behavior and distribution Altered availability and use of habitat

RESEARCH QUESTION
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting Upper Esopus Creek trout populations?
Assumption: differences in stream habitat conditions affect trout
Behavior Physiology

RESEARCH QUESTION
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting Upper Esopus Creek trout populations?
Assumption: differences in stream habitat conditions affect trout
Behavior Physiology Growth

PROJECT DESIGN
Phase I
Summer 2009 and 2010
Upstream versus downstream

Phase II
Summer 2011
Upstream versus tunnel-impact versus downstream

PROJECT DESIGN
Phase I
Summer 2009 and 2010
Upstream versus downstream

Phase II
Summer 2011
Upstream versus tunnel-impact versus downstream

PHASE I METHODS
Behavior
Radio-telemetry
Movement rates Apparent survival Thermal refuge use

PHASE I METHODS
Behavior
Radio-telemetry
Movement rates Apparent survival Thermal refuge use

PHASE I METHODS
Radio-telemetry

Anesthetization

PHASE I METHODS
Radio-telemetry

Anesthetization

PHASE I METHODS
Radio-telemetry

Incision

PHASE I METHODS
Radio-telemetry

Implantation

PHASE I METHODS
Radio-telemetry

Antenna exit

PHASE I METHODS
Radio-telemetry

Antenna

Suturing

PHASE I METHODS
Radio-telemetry

Tracking

PHASE I METHODS

Points are fish locations

PHASE I METHODS
Physiology
Water-content assessment

r2 = 0.68

Peters et al. 2007

Water and lipid content relationship

PHASE I METHODS
Physiology
Water-content assessment
Low water = high lipid

r2 = 0.68

Peters et al. 2007

Water and lipid content relationship

PHASE I METHODS
Physiology
Water-content assessment
Low water = high lipid

High water = low lipid

r2 = 0.68

Peters et al. 2007

Water and lipid content relationship

PHASE I METHODS
Physiology
Water-content assessment

Dangerous water content levels

r2 = 0.68

Peters et al. 2007

Water and lipid content relationship

PHASE I METHODS
Physiology
Water-content assessment

Dorsal muscle plug removal

PHASE I METHODS
Physiology
Water-content assessment

Dorsal muscle plug removal

Bioelectrical impedance analysis

PHASE I METHODS
Physiology
Water-content assessment

Dorsal muscle plug removal

Bioelectrical impedance analysis

PHASE I METHODS
Physiology
Fish health evaluation

Evaluation of parasite abundance

PHASE I METHODS
Physiology
Fish health evaluation
Histological examination of gill tissue

Evaluation of parasite abundance

PHASE I METHODS
Physiology
Fish health evaluation
Histological examination of gill tissue

Evaluation of parasite abundance

Blood sample collection for clinical chemistry

PHASE I METHODS

Shandaken Tunnel Confluence

PHASE I METHODS

Shandaken Tunnel Confluence

Upstream sampling sites

PHASE I METHODS

Shandaken Tunnel Confluence

Upstream sampling sites

Downstream sampling sites

PHASE I RESULTS
Radio-telemetry
Segment Apparent Survival (days) Daily Movement (mday-1) Total Movement (m) Occurrence in Thermal Refuge (%)

Mean SD

Mean SD

Mean SD

Upstream
Downstream

14.57 13.85
12.17 7.6

110.10 109.38
99.4 98.18

1182.52 1060.31
1108.7 1057.64

17.3
14.6

Tagged adult brown trout

Tagged adult brown trout

PHASE I RESULTS
Radio-telemetry
Segment Apparent Survival (days) Daily Movement (mday-1) Total Movement (m) Occurrence in Thermal Refuge (%)

Mean SD

Mean SD

Mean SD

Upstream
Downstream

14.57 13.85
12.17 7.6

110.10 109.38
99.4 98.18

1182.52 1060.31
1108.7 1057.64

17.3
14.6

No differences between upstream and downstream trout populations.

Tagged adult brown trout

Tagged adult brown trout

PHASE I RESULTS
Water-content assessment
No differences between populations
Segment Percent Water

Mean (SD) Upstream 77.3% (2.77%)

Downstream

76.7% (1.28%)

PHASE I RESULTS
Water-content assessment
No differences between populations
Segment Percent Water r2 = 0.68

Mean (SD) Upstream 77.3% (2.77%)

Peters et al. 2007

Water and lipid content relationship

Downstream

76.7% (1.28%)

Both populations near dangerous levels

PHASE I RESULTS
Fish health evaluation
Parasite abundance and histological examination
No differences between populations

Clinical chemistry assessment

Comparison with literature-derived normal values

PHASE I RESULTS
Fish health evaluation
Parasite abundance and histological examination
No differences between populations

Clinical chemistry assessment

Comparison with literature-derived normal values

PHASE I RESULTS
Fish health evaluation
Parasite abundance and histological examination
No differences between populations

Clinical chemistry assessment

Comparison with literature-derived normal values
Increased levels in trout from both segments: Creatine phosphokinase Total bilirubin Albumin Aspartate aminotransferase (AST)

PHASE I RESULTS
Fish health evaluation
Parasite abundance and histological examination
No differences between populations

Clinical chemistry assessment

Comparison with literature-derived normal values
Increased levels in trout from both segments: Creatine phosphokinase Total bilirubin Albumin Aspartate aminotransferase (AST) Decreased levels in trout from both segments:

Potassium Bicarbonate Creatinine Amylase

Phosphate Magnesium Alkaline phosphate

PHASE I RESULTS
Fish health evaluation
Parasite abundance and histological examination
No differences between populations

Clinical chemistry assessment

Comparison with literature-derived normal values
Increased levels in trout from both segments:

11 blood parameters all telling us the same Potassium Albumin Creatine thing: Trout in BOTH the upstreamPhosphate and Bicarbonate Magnesium Aspartate phosphokinase Creatinine Alkaline aminotransferase Total downstream segments are stressed. bilirubin Amylase phosphate (AST)

Decreased levels in trout from both segments:

PHASE I CONCLUSIONS
Differences in stream habitat between upstream and downstream segments

PHASE I CONCLUSIONS
Differences in stream habitat between upstream and downstream segments

Altered clinical chemistry in both populations

PHASE I CONCLUSIONS
Differences in stream habitat between upstream and downstream segments

Altered clinical chemistry in both populations

Potentially lethal water content levels in both populations

PHASE I CONCLUSIONS
Differences in stream habitat between upstream and downstream segments

Altered clinical chemistry in both populations

Potentially lethal water content levels in both populations

No differences in movement, apparent survival and thermal refuge use

PHASE I CONCLUSIONS
Differences in stream habitat between upstream and downstream segments

Altered clinical chemistry in both populations

Potentially lethal water content levels in both populations

No differences in movement, apparent survival and thermal refuge use

Why no differences between populations?

PHASE 1 CONCLUSIONS
Possible interpretations
Tradeoffs of stream segments Presence of localized, tunnel-impact zone

PHASE 1 CONCLUSIONS
Possible interpretations
Tradeoffs of stream segments Presence of localized, tunnel-impact zone

PHASE 1 CONCLUSIONS
Possible interpretations
Tradeoffs of stream segments Presence of localized, tunnel-impact zone

Sampling design of fish health evaluation allowed us to assess this.

PHASE I EXTENSION

Shandaken Tunnel Confluence

PHASE I EXTENSION

Shandaken Tunnel Confluence

Upstream sampling sites

PHASE I EXTENSION

Shandaken Tunnel Confluence

Upstream sampling sites

Downstream sampling sites

PHASE I EXTENSION

Shandaken Tunnel Confluence Upstream reach

PHASE I EXTENSION

Shandaken Tunnel Confluence Upstream reach

Downstream reach

PHASE I EXTENSION

Shandaken Tunnel Confluence Upstream reach

Tunnel-impact reach

Downstream reach

PHASE I EXTENSION
Example trend: Aspartate aminotransferase (AST)
1200

Aspartate Aminotransferase (U/L)

1000

800

600

400

200 -7.18 1 -4.91 -1.38 1.24 3.64 5.99 7.05 2 3 4 5 6 7 Distance Downstream From Shandaken Tunnel (km) 13.52 8

Site Number

PHASE I EXTENSION
Example trend: Aspartate aminotransferase (AST)
1200

Aspartate Aminotransferase (U/L)

Shandaken Tunnel

1000

800

600

400

200 -7.18 1 -4.91 -1.38 1.24 3.64 5.99 7.05 2 3 4 5 6 7 Distance Downstream From Shandaken Tunnel (km) 13.52 8

Site Number

PHASE I EXTENSION
Example trend: Aspartate aminotransferase (AST)
1200

Aspartate Aminotransferase (U/L)

Shandaken Tunnel

1000

800

600

400

200 -7.18 1 -4.91 -1.38 1.24 3.64 5.99 7.05 2 3 4 5 6 7 Distance Downstream From Shandaken Tunnel (km) 13.52 8

Site Number

PHASE I EXTENSION
Example trend: Aspartate aminotransferase (AST)
1200

Aspartate Aminotransferase (U/L)

Upstream reach

Shandaken Tunnel

1000

800

600

400

200 -7.18 1 -4.91 -1.38 1.24 3.64 5.99 7.05 2 3 4 5 6 7 Distance Downstream From Shandaken Tunnel (km) 13.52 8

Site Number

PHASE I EXTENSION
Example trend: Aspartate aminotransferase (AST)
1200

Aspartate Aminotransferase (U/L)

Shandaken Tunnel

1000

800

Tunnel-impact reach

600

400

200 -7.18 1 -4.91 -1.38 1.24 3.64 5.99 7.05 2 3 4 5 6 7 Distance Downstream From Shandaken Tunnel (km) 13.52 8

Site Number

PHASE I EXTENSION
Example trend: Aspartate aminotransferase (AST)
1200

Aspartate Aminotransferase (U/L)

Shandaken Tunnel

1000

800

Downstream reach

600

400

200 -7.18 1 -4.91 -1.38 1.24 3.64 5.99 7.05 2 3 4 5 6 7 Distance Downstream From Shandaken Tunnel (km) 13.52 8

Site Number

PHASE I EXTENSION
Similar trend observed for:
Calcium Total protein Globulin Glucose Alanine aminotransferase Total bilirubin Creatine kinase Bicarbonate Creatinine Amylase

PHASE I EXTENSION
Similar trend observed for:
Calcium Total protein Globulin Glucose Alanine aminotransferase Total bilirubin Creatine kinase Bicarbonate Creatinine Amylase

Ten blood parameters indicating the same thing: Trout within the tunnel-impact reach are either not stressed or less stressed than trout in other reaches

PROJECT DESIGN
Phase I
Summer 2009 and 2010
Upstream versus downstream

Phase II
Summer 2011
Upstream versus tunnel-impact versus downstream

PHASE II STUDY DESIGN

Shandaken Tunnel

Upstream reach

Tunnel -impact reach

Downstream reach

CCES 2007

PHASE II STUDY DESIGN

Stream reach characteristics
Reach Upstream Tunnel-impact Downstream Temperature (C) Mean SD 18.41 4.60 14.83 2.09 17.79 2.06 Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 7.50 3.42 11.32 5.58 9.59 9.96 Discharge (cfs-1) Mean SD 77.49 61.99 290.32 118.14 498.95 234.77

PHASE II STUDY DESIGN

Stream reach characteristics
Reach Upstream Tunnel-impact Downstream Temperature (C) Mean SD 18.41 4.60 14.83 2.09 17.79 2.06 Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 7.50 3.42 11.32 5.58 9.59 9.96 Discharge (cfs-1) Mean SD 77.49 61.99 290.32 118.14 498.95 234.77

Tunnel-impact reach has coldest temperatures

PHASE II STUDY DESIGN

Stream reach characteristics
Reach Upstream Tunnel-impact Downstream Temperature (C) Mean SD 18.41 4.60 14.83 2.09 17.79 2.06 Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 7.50 3.42 11.32 5.58 9.59 9.96 Discharge (cfs-1) Mean SD 77.49 61.99 290.32 118.14 498.95 234.77

Tunnel-impact reach has coldest temperatures Tunnel-impact reach has highest turbidity

PHASE II STUDY DESIGN

Stream reach characteristics
Reach Upstream Tunnel-impact Downstream Temperature (C) Mean SD 18.41 4.60 14.83 2.09 17.79 2.06 Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 7.50 3.42 11.32 5.58 9.59 9.96 Discharge (cfs-1) Mean SD 77.49 61.99 290.32 118.14 498.95 234.77

Tunnel-impact reach has coldest temperatures Tunnel-impact reach has highest turbidity Tunnel- impact reach has median stream flow

PHASE II STUDY DESIGN

Stream reach characteristics
Reach Upstream Tunnel-impact Downstream Temperature (C) Mean SD 18.41 4.60 14.83 2.09 17.79 2.06 Turbidity (NTU) Mean SD 7.50 3.42 11.32 5.58 9.59 9.96 Discharge (cfs-1) Mean SD 77.49 61.99 290.32 118.14 498.95 234.77

Tunnel-impact reach has coldest temperatures Tunnel-impact trend similar to that observed in blood Tunnel-impact reach has data: chemistry highest turbidity Upstream Tunnel-response Downstream Tunnel- impact reach has median stream flow

PHASE II METHODS
Within each reach
Behavior
Radio telemetry

Physiology
Water content assessment

Growth rates
Mark-recapture

PHASE II METHODS
Radio telemetry
Similar methodology to Phase I
Transmitter type Stocking scheme

Physiology
Water content assessment

Growth rates
Mark-recapture

PHASE II METHODS
Radio telemetry
Similar methodology to Phase I
Transmitter type Stocking scheme

Physiology
Water content assessment

Growth rates
Mark-recapture

PHASE II METHODS
Radio telemetry
Similar methodology to Phase I
Transmitter type Stocking scheme

Physiology
Water content assessment

Growth rates
Mark-recapture

PHASE II METHODS
Within each reach
Behavior
Radio telemetry

Physiology
Water content assessment

Growth rates
Mark-recapture

PHASE II METHODS
Water content assessment
Similar to Phase I
Only used bioelectrical impedance analysis

Growth rates
Mark-recapture

PHASE II METHODS
Within each reach
Behavior
Radio telemetry

Physiology
Water content assessment

Growth rates
Mark-recapture

PHASE II METHODS
Growth rates
Three sampling events per month in each reach Habitat
Monthly measures

PHASE II METHODS
Growth rates
Habitat
Monthly measures

PHASE II METHODS
Growth rates
Habitat
Monthly measures

PHASE II METHODS
Growth rates

Growth

(gramsday-1)=
Monthly measures

2 1

Habitat

PHASE II RESULTS
Radio-telemetry
Reach Apparent Survival (days) Mean SD Upstream Tunnel-impact Downstream 53.88 18.64 45.09 17.65 32.38 17.42 Daily Movement (mday-1) Mean SD 38.54 49.69 41.41 104.64 72.20 161.91 Total Movement (m) Mean SD 1391.05 2255.21 693.40 1000.81 501.77 177.35 Dispersal (m) Mean SD 1898.86 1469.14 2356.42 4034.20 2685.74 5530.38 Site Fidelity (days) Mean SD 39.38 21.75 34.36 18.65 18.38 15.90 11.55 9.16 7.11 Occurrence in Thermal Refuge (%)

PHASE II RESULTS
Radio-telemetry
Reach Apparent Survival (days) Mean SD Upstream Tunnel-impact Downstream 53.88 18.64 45.09 17.65 32.38 17.42 Daily Movement (mday-1) Mean SD 38.54 49.69 41.41 104.64 72.20 161.91 Total Movement (m) Mean SD 1391.05 2255.21 693.40 1000.81 501.77 177.35 Dispersal (m) Mean SD 1898.86 1469.14 2356.42 4034.20 2685.74 5530.38 Site Fidelity (days) Mean SD 39.38 21.75 34.36 18.65 18.38 15.90 11.55 9.16 7.11 Occurrence in Thermal Refuge (%)

No differences in quantified metrics.

PHASE II RESULTS
Water content assessment
Still being analyzedcoming soon, hopefully!

PHASE II RESULTS
Growth rates
Among-reach comparison

PHASE II RESULTS
Growth rates
Hatchery and wild comparison

PHASE II RESULTS
Growth rates
Hatchery: Among-reach comparison *

PHASE II RESULTS
Growth rates
Wild: Among-reach comparison

PHASE II RESULTS
Growth rates
Hatchery and wild: Among-reach comparison

PHASE II RESULTS
Growth rates
Hatchery and wild: Among-reach comparison

Appears to be both a hatchery/wild and stream reach affect on trout growth.

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting upper Esopus Creek trout populations?

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting upper Esopus Creek trout populations?

Blood chemistry indicated a localized tunnel-benefit.

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
1200
Aspartate Aminotransferase (U/L)

Shandaken Tunnel

1000

800

600

400

200 -7.18

-4.91 -1.38 1.24 3.64 5.99 7.05 2 3 4 5 6 7 Distance Downstream From Shandaken Tunnel (km)

13.52

Site Number

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting upper Esopus Creek trout populations?

Blood chemistry indicated a localized tunnel-benefit.

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting upper Esopus Creek trout populations?

Blood chemistry indicated a localized tunnel-benefit.

Growth rates indicated a localized tunnel-benefit, especially for hatchery trout.

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
Hatchery: Among-reach comparison *

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting upper Esopus Creek trout populations?

Blood chemistry indicated a localized tunnel-benefit.

Growth rates indicated a localized tunnel-benefit, especially for hatchery trout.

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting upper Esopus Creek trout populations?

Blood chemistry indicated a localized tunnel-benefit.

Growth rates indicated a localized tunnel-benefit, especially for hatchery trout.

What is driving this trend?

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting upper Esopus Creek trout populations?

Blood chemistry indicated a localized tunnel-benefit.

Growth rates indicated a localized tunnel-benefit, especially for hatchery trout.

What is driving this trend?

Temperature??

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting upper Esopus Creek trout populations?

Blood chemistry indicated a localized tunnel-benefit.

Growth rates indicated a localized tunnel-benefit, especially for hatchery trout.

What is driving this trend?

Temperature??

Turbidity??

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
How are Shandaken Tunnel releases affecting upper Esopus Creek trout populations?

Blood chemistry indicated a localized tunnel-benefit.

Growth rates indicated a localized tunnel-benefit, especially for hatchery trout.

What is driving this trend?

Temperature??

Turbidity??

Streamflow??

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
Future research
Bioenergetics modeling
Explicitly accounting for the affects of temperature, turbidity and flow on trout growth

Habitat modeling

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
Future research
Bioenergetics modeling
Explicitly accounting for the affects of temperature, turbidity and flow on trout growth

Habitat modeling
Temporal changes in habitat used by and available to trout
Better understand habitat variables driving trout distribution and habitat use

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
Future research
Bioenergetics modeling
Explicitly accounting for the affects of temperature, turbidity and flow on trout growth

Habitat modeling
Temporal changes in habitat used by and available to trout
Better understand habitat variables driving trout distribution and habitat use

FINAL CONCLUSIONS
Future research
Bioenergetics modeling
Explicitly accounting for the affects of temperature, turbidity and flow on trout growth

Habitat modeling
Temporal changes in habitat used by and available to trout
Better understand habitat variables driving trout distribution and habitat use

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

New York Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Cornell University United States Geological Survey Cornell Cooperative Extension New York City Department of Environmental Protection Trout Unlimited Doris Duke Foundation New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Special thanks to :
Dr. Paul Bowser and lab, for their assistance with the fish health assessment and telemetry surgeries Alex Koeberle, Collin Farrell, Walt Keller and Jackie Chen for help with daily operations Tom Baudanza, Bob Angyal, Tim McNamara for assistance with sampling efforts

Interesting Anecdotal Piece

Telemetered trout 151super trout!

QUESTIONS?