Assessing local and landscape patterns of residential shoreline development in Michigan lakes

Wehrly, Kevin E.; Breck, James E.; Wang, Lizhu; Szabo-Kraft, Lidia

doi:10.1080/07438141.2012.690824

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Much of the aquatic habitat destruction from residential development is focused around docks (Radomski et al 2010), and the density of docks along the shoreline is a useful measure of disturbance (Wehrly et al 2012a;Beck et al 2013a). An important step in our process was to determine the density at which accumulated disturbances are detrimental to habitats and fish communities.…”

Section: Physical Habitatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The interaction of these habitat types, within a climaticgeomorphic template (i.e., lake and watershed morphology, geologic parent material, temperature, and precipitation; see Soranno et al 2009), determines the structure of fish communities in lakes. Although temperature could be considered a third fundamental type of fish habitat in lakes (Jacobson et al 2010;Wehrly et al 2012b), we did not consider it for this framework. Thermal habitat warrants its own framework and is the primary focus of climate change adaptation efforts for lakes in Minnesota ) and around the world (Jeppesen et al 2009).…”

Section: Conceptual Model Of Fish Habitat In Lakesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, we used surrogate measures of habitat quality to assess habitat conditions on lakes statewide. Surrogate measures, representing important anthropogenic habitat disturbance generated using remote sensing methods and readily available geographic information system (GIS) data sets, have been useful for assessing fish habitat condition for a number of regional and national efforts (Wang et al 2010;Esselman et al 2011;Wehrly et al 2012a). The utility of these surrogate measures can be explored by examining relationships between the GIS-derived habitat data and actual in-lake habitat measures and fish communities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Full Issue PDF, Volume 41, Issue 6

2016

Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Physical Habitatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conceptual Model Of Fish Habitat In Lakesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Full Issue PDF, Volume 41, Issue 6

2016

Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…; Wehrly et al. ). Studies of land use change forecast that the densities of human development on lake shorelines will increase due to rising human populations and the high desirability of lakefront property (Peterson et al.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Influence of Aquatic Macrophytes on Age‐0 Largemouth Bass Growth and Diets

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Macrophyte removal by lakefront property owners occurs on glacial lakes throughout the range of Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides, yet little information exists on how it affects recruitment of these fish populations. We hypothesized that with greater prey availability in macrophytes, age‐0 Largemouth Bass consumption and growth would increase. To test this hypothesis, we conducted an in‐lake experiment with age‐0 Largemouth Bass in twelve 9.29‐m2 littoral mesocosms in glacial Chancellor Lake, Michigan, during summer and fall 2014. We removed macrophytes from mesocosm substrates to produce low‐coverage, high‐coverage, and vegetation edge treatments and determined treatment effects on consumption and growth at differing age‐0 Largemouth Bass stocking densities (0.86–2.15 fish/m2). When macrophytes were present, age‐0 Largemouth Bass stomachs contained fewer zooplankton, contained terrestrial invertebrates more often, and contained aquatic macroinvertebrates less often than when macrophytes were absent. Age‐0 Largemouth Bass consumed more fish prey in macrophyte edge and high macrophyte coverage enclosures stocked at moderate densities, resulting in total stomach content biomass increases that increased growth and, potentially, recruitment. Age‐0 Largemouth Bass from enclosures with macrophyte edge and high macrophyte coverage grew 9.7 ± 2.2% (mean ± SD) and 8.3 ± 1.9% longer, respectively, than their counterparts in low macrophyte coverage enclosures; fish in macrophyte edge or high macrophyte coverage treatments at moderate stocking density gained 109.3 ± 45.1% and 110.7 ± 45.0% more weight, respectively, than those in low‐coverage enclosures. These results demonstrate a causal linkage between macrophytes and age‐0 Largemouth Bass consumption and growth in lakes. We recommend that fisheries managers seeking to increase consumption and growth rates in age‐0 Largemouth Bass consider protecting and restoring macrophytes in littoral habitats up to 60% coverage to potentially decrease mortality and improve recruitment.

show abstract

“…Rapid economic development and urbanization have increased water consumption worldwide (WHO 2003), leading to water supply shortages and water quality degradation, which subsequently increase water-stress risks and threaten food security (Jiang 2009, Wang et al 2012b, Wehrly et al 2012. Due to intensive human disturbance, the majority of shallow lakes are particularly subject to anthropogenic impacts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%