Henning Sussman Internship Final Report
Evaluating the near-shore fish community response to restored
habitat connectivity in robust cattail marshes of the upper St.
Lawrence River
Brian F. Henning
SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry
Final Report to the Edna Bailey Sussman Foundation 2011
Introduction
The expansion of robust cattail has limited the movement of fish
throughout many extensive littoral areas of the St. Lawrence River
leading to loss and decreased connectivity among wetland spawning
habitats. The loss of suitable spawning habitat as a result of
anthropogenic disturbances, water level management and the
encroachment of an invasive hybrid cattail has contributed to
decreased northern pike Esox lucius populations in the St. Lawrence
River. To mitigate these effects, restoration projects have been
implemented to reestablish connections between protected embayments
as part of the St. Lawrence River Fish Habitat Conservation
Strategy. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service excavated
approximately 914 linear meters of channels and placed 4 culverts
for fish passage in a cattail marsh in Blind Bay marsh and another
244 linear meters at Club Island with an amphibious excavator. The
objective of the restoration projects was to reconnect embayments,
create more access to suitable spawning habitat for northern pike
and increase connectivity to promote movement of near-shore fishes.
The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effect of the
restoration projects on the near-shore fish community, monitor fish
community usage and movement in excavated channels and to assess
the efficacy of the projects to enhance northern pike
populations.
Completed ResearchChannel Usage by Fish
Study sites and channel description- The study was conducted
within the Thousand Islands region of the upper St. Lawrence River
(Figure 1). The Blind Bay restoration project (Figure 2) is located
approximately 38km down river from the Club Island restoration
project. A reference location that was unimpacted (no restoration
activity) comprised of two reference sites (Thurso and Long Point)
was selected based on the following criteria: 1) location contained
two embayments bisected by a cattail marsh, 2) location consisted
of an open and protected embayment with similar orientation to
river flow and wind energy as treatment sites, and 3) physical
habitat characteristics, substrate and vegetation were
representative of the treatment embayments. Channel dimensions from
the Club Island restoration site had an average wetted width of
2.31 m and an average depth of .27m on 7 October 2011. The Club
Island channels were .59 meters wider and 0.01 meters deeper on
average than Blind Bay marsh channels. Water levels within the
marshes peaked on 31 May 2010 at which time water in the channels
was above bankfull and the entire marsh was inundated. A cattail
mat that detached from within the marsh became dislodged in the
southern fork of the Club Island channels limiting exchange of
dissolved oxygen and decreasing aquatic connectivity from June to
present day. Channel heads in Chippewa Bay were often and at times
permanently clogged with floating debris and violent spring storms
and heavy wave activity created sand burms across the entire
opening of the head of the channels preventing fish access into the
Blind Bay marsh restoration area from Chippewa Bay. In addition
cattail debris from the excavator along with floating river debris
often clogged the culverts along Chippewa Point Road thus impeding
flow, dissolved oxygen exchange, and fish passage at times of low
water. Channel maintenance was identified as a major issue limiting
aquatic connectivity, as culverts often became blocked and cattail
mats break off and become lodged in the channel limiting fish
passage to the marsh.
Figure 1. Map of the upper St. Lawrence River, showing study
sites within the Thousand Islands region. Green areas represent
robust cattail marshes reducing connectivity between
embayments.
Figure 2. Blind Bay Restoration site illustrating excavated
channels through a cattail marsh reconnecting embayments. The blue
squares represent culverts placed under the road for fish passage
into the marsh.
Blind Bay Restoration-We collected a total of 9 species
representing 4 families from within Blind Bay Marsh. Only one
target species, grass pickerel was documented within an excavated
channel in the marsh (Table 1). Two species of non-native
cyprinids, Rudd Scardinius erythrophthalmus and Common carp
Cyprinus carpio were captured in the channels. The middle channel
was the only location sampled because it maintained aquatic
connectivity during the entirety of the study. Pumpkinseed were the
most abundant species in the channels comprising 43% of the total
catch, largemouth bass (N=2) were the most abundant target species
sampled.
Club Island Restoration-A total of 11 species representing 8
families were sampled in excavated channels from within the Club
Island restoration site. Two targeted species largemouth bass and
northern pike were documented using the channel during the study
period (Table 1). The only non native fish species present in the
excavated channels was round goby Neogobius melanostomus.
Pumpkinseed were the most abundant species in the channels
comprising 53 % of the total catch, largemouth bass (N=6) were the
most abundant target species sampled. A total of 3 northern pike
were sampled within excavated channels at Club Island during the
study.
Table 1. Fish species sampled in excavated channels at Blind Bay
Marsh and Club Island Restoration sites during 2011. Presence of
fish species is denoted by an X, presence of a non native fish NN,
and T for targeted species.
Evaluating Movements of Target Fish Species in Response to
Restored Connectivity
Tagging results-A combination of Oneida and hoop nets were set
in embayments (8 April- 31 May 2011, a total of 54 net nights)
adjacent to the restoration sites to capture target fish species
and implant them with passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags and
mark each fish with a unique bay specific fin clip. Fish were also
sampled and tagged opportunistically by within channel hoop nets
and mini fyke nets set bi-directionally within excavated channels
22 May- 27 June 2011. Fish were also sampled and PIT tagged during
seining and boat electrofishing surveys (7 July- 25 August 2011). A
total of 335 PIT tags were implanted into target fish species
between Blind Bay and Club Island restoration sites. Largemouth
bass received the most PIT tags (N=159) followed by northern pike
(N=153), together comprising 93% of the total number of fish tagged
in the study (Table 2). Targeted fish tagged ranged in size:
largemouth bass (106-475mm) with the mean length of fish tagged
293mm; northern pike (106-860mm) mean length 478mm; muskellunge
(288-1270mm) mean 704mm; grass pickerel (174-277mm) mean length
218mm; and one chain pickerel at 455mm.
Table 2. Summary of PIT tagged fish in 2011 at Club Island and
Blind Bay Restoration sites.
Fish Movement- A total of 16 out of 335 fish PIT tagged in 2011
were recaptured during the duration of the study. Only 2 fish were
recaptured in a different bay from which it was originally tagged,
indicating possible movement through the restoration area. A 495 mm
ripe male northern pike was recaptured in Flynn Bay on 19 April
after being tagged in Lindley Bay on 12 April 2011. In addition, a
183mm largemouth bass was recaptured while seining in Lindley bay
on 16 August 2011. The remaining 14 fish were recaptured in
proximity to where it was originally tagged. No muskellunge, chain
pickerel or grass pickerel were recaptured during the study.
Response of Fish Assemblages to Restored Aquatic
Connectivity
I evaluated the effects of the implemented restoration projects
on the near-shore fish community and compared pre-restoration to
post restoration fish assemblage data. Using principal component
analysis (PCA) (based on the density of fish species at each site)
no clear sign of restoration effects were detected due to the large
amount of variation between fish assemblages as a result of a low
water year in 2010 and a high water year in 2011(Figure 3). The PCA
revealed two patterns: 1) fish assemblages from protected
embayments differed from those of open embayments regardless of
geographic location in the St. Lawrence River, and 2) fish
assemblages from protected embayments were comprised of fish
species more tolerant to low dissolved oxygen conditions and
habitat degradation. The results suggest that longer term
monitoring is need to evaluate the effects of restoring aquatic
connectivity of near shore fish assemblages due to the inter annual
variation of water levels that affect fish production in embayments
of the upper St. Lawrence River.
Figure 3. Principal component analysis of fish assemblages from
7 seining sites within the upper St. Lawrence River from 2010 (Pre-
restoration) and 2011 (Post restoration). The first principal
component(PC1) accounted for 23% of the variation in the fish
assemblages; the second principal component (PC2) accounted for 41%
of the variation in fish assemblages. Axis labels refer to
abbreviations of fish species that had significant (>0.5)
component loadings used in ecological interpretation of the model.
MUSK=Muskellunge, RB=Rock bass, SPTL= Spottail shiner, PUG= Pugnose
shiner, PS= Pumpkinseed, LMB= Largemouth bass, TADM= Tadpole
madtom, CMM= Central mudminnow, BLCR= Black crappie, BKSV= Brook
silverside, EMS= Emerald shiner, FATH= Fathead minnow, LNG=
Longnose gar, YP= Yellow perch.
Project Conclusions
A total of 17 fish species were captured in excavated channels
less than one year from the creation of the new habitat. Although
the project objective was to enhance northern pike spawning and
nursery habitat, the new habitat was utilized by several other
native species besides northern pike (Table 1). Improved water
management practices would further promote the use of the
restoration areas by northern pike by providing a more natural flow
regime with higher spring flows to provide access to spawning
areas. Fish movements as indicated from PIT tag mark and recapture
data reveal that most adult fish tagged in the spring of 2011 were
not recaptured in summer 2011 electrofishing surveys thus
suggesting that adult northern pike, muskellunge, grass pickerel
and largemouth bass make larger movements during the spring
spawning season and are more likely to use the excavated channels
during that time. However, smaller young of the year and age 1
fishes such as largemouth bass and northern pike were sampled and
observed in and near the excavated channels suggesting that these
species use the habitat for nursery or as a connective corridor to
access nursery habitat.
The fish assemblage response to the newly created connectivity
was inconclusive; thus suggesting that longer term monitoring is
needed to evaluate the effects of restoring aquatic connectivity of
near shore fish assemblages due to the inter annual variation of
water levels that affect fish production in embayments of the upper
St. Lawrence River. Additionally improvements to channel design and
maintenance should be encouraged to provide unimpeded access to the
marsh not only during the spring spawning season but for the
crucial summer months to provide nursery habitat for young of the
year fishes.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my advisor Dr. John M. Farrell and the
students and staff of the Thousands Islands Biological Station as
well as my host sponsor, Scott Schlueter of the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service for their support during this project. I would
also like to thank the Edna Bailey Sussman Foundation for providing
the support for this research. The Edna Bailey Sussman Foundation
was recognized at the American Fisheries Society annual meeting in
Seattle, WA where I presented my research this past September.
Figure 4. United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s amphibious
excavator used to excavate channels and restore connectivity at
Blind Bay and Club Island restoration sites.
Figure 5. Club Island excavated channel April 14, 2011Figure 6.
Club Island excavated channel June 30, 2011
Figure 7. Blind Bay excavated channels May 25, 2011 Figure 8.
B.F. Henning with a northern pike captured from Blind Bay
Figure 9.Implanting a PIT tag into a largemouth bass Figure 10.
Scanning a northern pike for a PIT tag with reader
Page | 3
Species
Blind Bay
Restoration
Club Island
Restoration
Banded killifish Fundulus diaphanus X
Black crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus X
Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus X
Bluntnose minnow Pimephales notatus X
Bowfin Amia calva X
Brown Bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus X
Common carp Cyprinus carpio NN
Grass pickerel Esox americanus vermiculatus T
Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides TT
Northern pike Esox lucius T
Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus XX
Rockbass Ambloplites rupestris XX
Round Goby Neogobius melanostomus NN
Rudd Scardinius erythrophthalmus NN
Tadpole madtom Noturus gyrinus X
Tesselated darter Etheostoma olmstedi X
Yellow perch Perca flavescens X
Location
Total PIT tags
implanted
Northern
pike
Largemouth
bass
Muskellunge
Chain
pickerel
Grass
pickerel
Club Island Restoration
Lindley613821110
Flynn954647200
Blind Bay Marsh Restoration
Sand923655100
Sheephead22517000
Blind6528191017
TOTALS3351531595117
-6-5-4-3-2-101234-4-202468
2011 assemblage 2010 assemblage Site impacted by restorationRed
= Protected EmbaymentBlack= Open Embayment
Sand2011Blind2011Thurso2011Lind2011Sheep2011Sand2010Blind2010Long2011Long2010Lind2010Sheep2010Thurso2010
PC1
PC2
BLCR,BG,BKSV,EMS,FATH,LNG,RB,YPTADM,CMMMUSK,RB,SPTLPUG,PS,LMB
LEGEND
PCA of Fish Assemblages Pre and Post Restoration
PC1
PC2
BLCR,BG,BKSV,EMS,FATH,LNG,RB,YP
TADM,CMM
MUSK,RB,SPTL
PUG,PS,LMB
LEGEND
PCA of Fish Assemblages Pre and Post Restoration
-1.68330.621589999999999981.0735299999999968-2.8064699999999925-0.26819000000000004-2.6053799999999998-0.972209999999999690.88186000000000053-3.01360999999999776.11429999999999652.43874999999999440.11423999999999998-2.11620999999999442.2210999999999999-0.169220000000000290.23533000000000001-0.813250000000000031.2537999999999958-2.20750000000000620.6970300000000017-2.58772000000000622.86323000000000021.347272.85019999999999871.1484300000000001-0.806890000000001441.7216999999999973-5.5324200000000001