Greater Dispersal of Wild Compared with Hatchery-Reared Juvenile Atlantic Salmon Released in Streams

Symons, Philip E. K.

doi:10.1139/f69-170

Cited by 31 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, the HOR parr from the egg boxes that were placed in the same geographical area as natural redds were (30–50 rkm) dispersed the longest distances (Figure ), which suggests that density‐dependent competition with NOR Chinook Salmon may have influenced the dispersal behavior of the HOR parr. Consistent with prior studies (Symons ; Cresswell ; Weber and Fausch ; Andrews et al. ), we found that NOR fish dispersed greater distances, with an estimated median dispersal distance of NOR parr almost 200% greater than that of HOR fish (Figure ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…In contrast, the HOR parr from the egg boxes that were placed in the same geographical area as natural redds were (30-50 rkm) dispersed the longest distances (Figure 9), which suggests that density-dependent competition with NOR Chinook Salmon may have influenced the dispersal behavior of the HOR parr. Consistent with prior studies (Symons 1969;Cresswell 1981;Weber Figure 8). In addition to the possible role of density-dependent competition, we speculate that this pronounced difference may have been influenced by selection for sedentary habits in multigeneration segregated hatchery broodstocks (Einum and Fleming 2001), environmental differences between the egg boxes and natural redds (e.g., egg incubation temperature, food availability, interactions with resident fish, etc.…”

Section: Objective 3: Performance Of Hor Versus Nor Progenysupporting

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In‐Stream Egg Incubators Produce Hatchery Chinook Salmon with Similarities to and Differences from Natural Juveniles

Conley

Ebel

Hargrove

et al. 2020

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Supplementing fish populations at the egg stage is a low‐cost alternative to hatchery rearing that is presumed to improve adaptation to local natural conditions. The Shoshone‐Bannock Tribes began supplementing Chinook Salmon Onchorynchus tschwytscha in Panther Creek, Idaho, at the eyed egg stage in 2014. The Chinook Salmon eggs were artificially fertilized and reared to eye‐up in the hatchery and then planted in custom‐made in‐stream incubators (egg boxes) for volitional release and natural rearing. Using data from three brood years, we evaluated the efficacy of this supplementation program solely in terms of juvenile production. We related juvenile production to the placement and retrieval of the egg boxes, assessed the relative contributions of offspring (parr and emigrants) from the egg boxes (HOR) to overall juvenile abundance, and compared the performance (length, condition, dispersal distance, and survival) of HOR versus natural‐origin (NOR) juveniles. Brood year and box placement within the stream (distance upstream) were the best predictors of whether or not an egg box was retrieved from its original location. Meanwhile, the condition of the box (i.e., intact, damaged, or missing) was the best single predictor of juvenile production. Supplemented eggs represented an estimated 42, 50, and 42% of the total egg deposition in Panther Creek in brood years 2014, 2015, and 2016, respectively. A parentage analysis revealed that the egg boxes accounted for 6, 22, and 35%, respectively, of the parr production for the respective brood years when the data were normalized to the estimated egg deposition—less than the egg‐to‐parr production that was estimated for natural redds. As fall parr, the HOR fish differed from the NOR fish in terms of their length and dispersal behavior, but they were of similar length and condition at their emigration from Panther Creek and exhibited no significant difference in downstream survival through the Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS). Collectively, our results provide useful insights to fisheries managers who are interested in initiating or refining egg supplementation programs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Objective 3: Performance Of Hor Versus Nor Progenysupporting

confidence: 92%

In‐Stream Egg Incubators Produce Hatchery Chinook Salmon with Similarities to and Differences from Natural Juveniles

Conley

Ebel

Hargrove

et al. 2020

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regardless, the lack of effect on S and φ for wild trout suggests that not only was survival of wild trout unaffected by catchables, but stocking also did not cause any additional emigration when hatchery trout were stocked. Although displacement of wild fish by hatchery fish has been demonstrated in both laboratory and stream settings (see review in Weber and Fausch 2003), including at the reach scale (Symons 1969), our study reaches in general were nowhere near the spatial carrying capacity for wild trout (mean PHS = 20%). Thus, it is not surprising that the addition of hatchery fish caused no additional emigration of wild trout over a level that is considered normal for streamdwelling salmonids.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Effects of Stocking Catchable‐Sized Hatchery Rainbow Trout on Wild Rainbow Trout Abundance, Survival, Growth, and Recruitment

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Idaho Department of Fish and Game has proactively dealt with the potential adverse genetic effects of stocking catchable-sized hatchery trout in waters that support native salmonids by adopting a policy in 2001 whereby only sterile rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss are stocked in flowing waters; however, concerns regarding the competitive effects of introducing hatchery trout into streams and rivers supporting wild trout have not been addressed. We stocked fish in the middle 3 years of a 5-year study to assess whether stocking hatchery rainbow trout of catchable size (hereafter, catchables) reduced the abundance, survival, growth, or recruitment of wild rainbow trout in streams. Catchables averaging 249 mm total length (TL) were stocked from 2006 to 2008 at an annual density of 4.2 fish/100 m 2 into 12 treatment reaches of stream that were paired with control reaches at least 3 km apart in the same stream in which no stocking occurred. Wild rainbow trout abundance (including all fish ≥75 mm TL), recruitment, survival, and growth were determined from population estimates and recaptures of fish tagged with passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags during mark-recapture electrofishing sampling. The abundance of wild rainbow trout averaged 13.2 fish/100 m 2 but varied substantially across sites and years, ranging from a low of 0.5 to a high of 131.3 fish/100 m 2 ; similar variability was observed in recruitment to age 1. Estimates of total annual survival averaged 0.53 based on the population abundance estimates (which allowed for emigration and immigration) and 0.26 based on the PIT-tag recaptures (which allowed for emigration but not immigration). Our paired study design demonstrated that the abundance, survival, growth, and recruitment to age 1 of wild rainbow trout were all unaffected by stocking catchables. The lack of population-level effects from stocking catchables was not surprising considering the high short-term mortality and the socially and physiologically naive behavior typically exhibited by hatchery catchables stocked in lotic systems.

show abstract

“…However, the use of hatchery fish as a surrogate for wild fish is called into question by the many genotypic and phenotypic differences between hatchery and wild fish stocks (Lorenzen et al 2012). Cumulatively, differences in the hatchery environment have the potential to lead to differences in behaviour (Symons 1969;Hill et al 2006;Roberts et al 2011), physiology (Folmar & Dickhoff 1980;Shrimpton et al 1994;Congleton et al 2000), stress response (Pottinger 2006), health and nutritional condition (Wood et al 1957;Ludwig 1982;Powell et al 2010) and ultimately, survival (Kennedy et al 2007) relative to wild conspecifics. In particular, cultured fish are often subjected to disturbance and handling stress in the form of crowding and transfer between tanks, grading and culling, anaesthesia (e.g.…”

Section: Reliance On Hatchery Fishmentioning

confidence: 99%

The physiological consequences of catch‐and‐release angling: perspectives on experimental design, interpretation, extrapolation and relevance to stakeholders

Cooke

Donaldson

O’Connor

et al. 2012

Fisheries Management Eco

167

156

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past 20 years, there has been a dramatic increase in the use of physiological tools and experimental approaches for the study of the biological consequences of catch‐and‐release angling practices for fishes. Beyond simply documenting problems, physiological data are also being used to test and refine different strategies for handling fish such that stress is minimised and survival probability maximised, and in some cases, even for assessing and facilitating recovery post‐release. The inherent sensitivity of physiological processes means that nearly every study conducted has found some level of – unavoidable – physiological disturbance arising from recreational capture and subsequent release. An underlying tenet of catch‐and‐release studies that incorporate physiological tools is that a link exists between physiological status and fitness. In reality, finding such relationships has been elusive, with further extensions of individual‐level impacts to fish populations even more dubious. A focus of this article is to describe some of the challenges related to experimental design and interpretation that arise when using physiological tools for the study of the biological consequences of catch‐and‐release angling. Means of overcoming these challenges and the extrapolation of physiological data from individuals to the population level are discussed. The argument is presented that even if it is difficult to demonstrate strong links to mortality or other fitness measures, let alone population‐level impacts of catch‐and‐release, there remains merit in using physiological tools as objective indicators of fish welfare, which is an increasing concern in recreational fisheries. The overarching objective of this paper is to provide a balanced critique of the use of physiological approaches in catch‐and‐release science and of their role in providing meaningful information for anglers and managers.

show abstract

Greater Dispersal of Wild Compared with Hatchery-Reared Juvenile Atlantic Salmon Released in Streams

Cited by 31 publications

References 6 publications

In‐Stream Egg Incubators Produce Hatchery Chinook Salmon with Similarities to and Differences from Natural Juveniles

In‐Stream Egg Incubators Produce Hatchery Chinook Salmon with Similarities to and Differences from Natural Juveniles

Effects of Stocking Catchable‐Sized Hatchery Rainbow Trout on Wild Rainbow Trout Abundance, Survival, Growth, and Recruitment

The physiological consequences of catch‐and‐release angling: perspectives on experimental design, interpretation, extrapolation and relevance to stakeholders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About