Blackfoot River fisheries inventory, monitoring and restoration : report 2001

Pierce, Ron.; McFee, Jim.; Podner, Craig.

doi:10.5962/bhl.title.130189

Cited by 5 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…surveys, we observed a high Density/lOOO' + 95% CI 200 175 150 125 100 75 50 25 incidence of fungal infections rA" i / RESULTS PART III: RIVER RESTORATION TRIBUTARY ASSESSMENTS As a continuation of eight previous reports detailing fisheries investigations of Blackfoot River tributaries (Peters 1990; Pierce and Peters 1990; Pierce, Peters and Swanberg 1997; Pierce and Schmetterling 1999;Pierce and Podner 2000;Pierce, Podner and McFee, 2001;2002: Pierce, Anderson andPodner 2004), this section summarizes the 2004 and 2005 restoration actions and fisheries-related monitoring for 26 streams. Fish population statistics, catch and sizes and density estimates, for these streams are located in Appendices A and B, respectively.…”

Section: Johnsrud Sectionsupporting

confidence: 56%

“…Bull trout recovery began in the Blackfoot Watershed in 1990 when the FWP Commission adopted basin-wide catch-and-release regulations. Recovery then expanded in the 1 990s with an emphasis on improving fish passage, restoring degraded habitat, and screening irrigation diversions in "'core area" (Gold Creek, Cottonwood Creek, Monture Creek and North Fork) watersheds (Pierce et al 2001). In 1998, bull trout in the Columbia (MBTRT 2000).…”

Section: Bull Trout Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on "recreational risks" for bull trout recovery, we recently identified bull trout recoveryrecreational conflict areas (Pierce et al 2001). These conflict areas refer to biologically critical sites (key spawning, rearing and staging areas, important migration corridors and areas of thermal refuge) that overlap with recreational developments, increased angler pressure and illegal bull trout harvest problems.…”

Section: Bull Trout Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Big Blackfoot River Fisheries restoration report for 2004 and 2005

Pierce¹,

Podner²

2006

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Johnsrud Sectionsupporting

confidence: 56%

Section: Bull Trout Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Bull Trout Recoverymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Big Blackfoot River Fisheries restoration report for 2004 and 2005

Pierce¹,

Podner²

2006

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These sources are also cited in the nine FWP reports. For this prioritization report, we also relied on a summary list of fisheries-impaired streams taken fi"om the most recent FWP report (Pierce et al 2002), located in Appendbc C of this report.…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fish population investigations found that early life-stages of salmonids in the lower Blackfoot River rely on tributaries. Tributary assessments reported extensive problems, spanning multiple land ownerships that resulted in fish population declines at a watershed scale (Peters andSpoon 1989, Peters 1990, Pierce et al 1997, Pierce and Schmetterling 1999, Pierce and Podner 2000, Pierce et al 2001, Pierce et al 2002.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A hierarchical strategy for prioritizing the restoration of 83 impaired tributaries of the Big Blackfoot River

Pierce¹

2002

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Moderate (2/3) 2002 Gallagher Creek, a 2°^o rder tributary to upper Nevada Creek, flows~7 miles through both public (National Forest) land in headwaters and private land downstream of mile~3. Low native species value, low water quality benefits, no sport fishery value to the Blackfoot River, ranks Gallagher Creek low on the restoration priority list for non-project streams. Gallagher Creek supports only resident WSCT. The lower reaches support low densities of WSCT that increase to moderate numbers in middle reaches. Fisheries impairments in lower reaches include localized livestock-induced stream bank damage and an undersized culvert.

show abstract

Does Whirling Disease Mediate Hybridization between a Native and Nonnative Trout?

Carim

Eby

Pierce

2015

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The spread of nonnative species over the last century has profoundly altered freshwater ecosystems, resulting in novel species assemblages. Interactions between nonnative species may alter their impacts on native species, yet few studies have addressed multispecies interactions. The spread of whirling disease, caused by the nonnative parasite Myxobolus cerebralis, has generated declines in wild trout populations across western North America. Westslope Cutthroat Trout Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi in the northern Rocky Mountains are threatened by hybridization with introduced Rainbow Trout O. mykiss. Rainbow Trout are more susceptible to whirling disease than Cutthroat Trout and may be more vulnerable due to differences in spawning location. We hypothesized that the presence of whirling disease in a stream would (1) reduce levels of introgressive hybridization at the site scale and (2) limit the size of the hybrid zone at the whole‐stream scale. We measured levels of introgression and the spatial extent of hybridization between Rainbow Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout in four disease‐positive streams and six disease‐negative streams within the Blackfoot River basin of Montana. In addition to disease status, we considered habitat quality, stream slope, distance from the confluence, temperature, and elevation. Whirling disease presence was not associated with either the level of introgression at a site or the size of the hybrid zone. Temperature, elevation, and stream slope were all influential in determining levels of introgression at the site scale. Stream slope was the most influential factor determining the size of the hybrid zone, as longer, steeper streams contained smaller hybrid zones. Stream slope is a driver of many habitat characteristics that may provide refuge from invasive species in the coming decades. Although the multispecies interactions examined in this study did not alter the impacts of invasion on native species, community assemblages will continue to change with the spread of nonnative species, requiring continued assessment to determine their impacts on native species.Received May 15, 2014; accepted January 7, 2015

show abstract

Blackfoot River fisheries inventory, monitoring and restoration : report 2001

Cited by 5 publications

References 8 publications

The Big Blackfoot River Fisheries restoration report for 2004 and 2005

The Big Blackfoot River Fisheries restoration report for 2004 and 2005

A hierarchical strategy for prioritizing the restoration of 83 impaired tributaries of the Big Blackfoot River

Does Whirling Disease Mediate Hybridization between a Native and Nonnative Trout?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About