Reintroduction of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) into
the St. Regis River, NY: Post- Release Assessment of Habitat
Use and Growth
Dawn E. Dittman, Marc A. Chalupnicki, James H. Johnson and James Snyder
Northeastern Naturalist, Volume 22, Issue 4 (2015): 704–716
Full-text pdf (Accessible only to subscribers. To subscribe click here.)
Access Journal Content
Open access browsing of table of contents and abstract pages. Full text pdfs available for download for subscribers.
Current Issue: Vol. 30 (3)
Check out NENA's latest Monograph:
Monograph 22
Northeastern Naturalist
704
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
22001155 NORTHEASTERN NATURALIST 2V2(o4l). :2720,4 N–7o1. 64
Reintroduction of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) into
the St. Regis River, NY: Post- Release Assessment of Habitat
Use and Growth
Dawn E. Dittman1,*, Marc A. Chalupnicki1, James H. Johnson1, and James Snyder2
Abstract - One of the depleted endemic fish species of the Great Lakes, Acipenser fulvescens
(Lake Sturgeon), has been the target of extensive conservation efforts. One strategy is
reintroduction into historically productive waters. The St. Regis River, NY, represents one
such adaptive-management effort, with shared management between New York and the St.
Regis Mohawk Tribe. Between 1998 and 2004, a total of 4977 young-of-year Lake Sturgeon
were released. Adaptive management requires intermediate progress metrics. During 2004
and 2005, we measured growth, habitat use, and survivorship metrics of the released fish.
We captured a total of 95 individuals of all stocked ages. Year-class minimal-survival rates
ranged from 0.19–2.1%. The size-at-age and length/biomass relationships were comparable
to those reported for juveniles in other Great Lakes waters. These intermediate assessment
metrics can provide feedback to resource managers who make restoration-program
decisions on a much shorter time-scale than the time-frame in which the ultimate goal of a
self-sustaining population can be attained.
Introduction
Acipenser fulvescens (Rafinesque) (Lake Sturgeon) is one of the many species of
sturgeon that are in serious decline throughout their native ranges (Bemis and Kynard
1997, Pollock et al. 2014), with many populations listed as either locally threatened
or endangered (Auer 2004, Harkness and Dymond 1961, Peterson et al. 2007, Pikitch
et al. 2005). The biology and life-history characteristics of this Lake Sturgeon are
typical of an easily threatened species, i.e., vulnerable to overfishing, habitat fragmentation,
and compromises to spawning- and feeding-habitat quality (Harkness and
Dymond 1961, Peterson et al. 2007). Multiple resource-management agencies have
identified Lake Sturgeon as a target for recovery and restoration throughout the Great
Lakes Basin (Auer 2004, Schram et al. 1999, Velez-Espino and Koops 2009, WIDNR
2000) and specifically in the Lake Ontario–St. Lawrence River subsystem (Carlson
1995, Mailhot et al. 2011). In New York waters, all of which have connectivity to
international waters (Velez-Espino and Koops 2009), the status of Lake Sturgeon is
either uncommon or extirpated in inland waters and has been classified as threatened
by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) since
1983 (Carlson 1995). In 1993, the NYSDEC initiated a rehabilita tion program with
the goal of restoration of Lake Sturgeon as a viable-self sustaining component of the
fish community of the St. Lawrence River and its tributaries, including the St. Regis
1US Geological Survey, Great Lakes Science Center, Tunison Laboratory of Aquatic Science,
3075 Gracie Road, Cortland, NY 13045. 2St. Regis Mohawk Tribe Environment Division, 412
State Route 37, Hogansburg, NY 13655. *Corresponding author - ddittman@usgs.gov.
Manuscript Editor: Tom Maier
Northeastern Naturalist Vol. 22, No. 4
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015
705
River (Carlson 2000, LaPan et al. 2002). Carlson (1995, 2001) found only a few anecdotal
undated St. Regis River records for his review of Lake Sturgeon waters, with
no documented sturgeon use, even before the 1930s. The observed absence of the species
was primarily due to a dam that blocked access to most of the system (Bruch and
Binkowski 2002, Carlson 1995). The St. Regis River flows through the territory of the
St. Regis Mohawk Tribe (SMRT). Thus, this research, as a joint effort of the federal,
state, and tribal agencies, represents a step toward shared management of natural resources
(Holzkamm and Waisberg 2004).
One effective management tool used in threatened-species conservation and
restoration is the stocking of hatchery-produced fish into areas where the original
populations have severely declined or are extirpated (Ireland et al. 2002, Lintermans
2013). The recovery plan for the New York/International waters was
initiated with a target of stocking a total of 5000 young-of–year (YOY) into
each water body where Lake Sturgeon historically occurred or where the population
was compromised (Carlson 2000, LaPan et al. 2002). When using stocking
to restore fish populations, a holistic approach includes short-term assessment
of post-stocking survival, growth, and habitat use by the hatchery-reared fish
(Ireland et al. 2002, Seddon et al. 2006) as intermediate metrics of restoration
progress. Post-release field assessments of the status of juvenile sturgeon are
critically needed to provide short-term feedback on hatchery techniques and
stocking procedures that may help produce specimens best able to survive in the
wild (Auer 2004, Pegasov 2009, Seddon et al. 2006). One or 2 Lake Sturgeon generations
(25–50 y) will be required to reach the ultimate goals of a Lake Sturgeon
rehabilitation program (Velez-Espino and Koops 2009, WIDNR 2000); however,
management decisions often need to be made in much shorter timeframes (2–5 y).
The goal of this project was to measure short-term intermediate metrics of Lake
Sturgeon restoration progress including: presence, growth, and habitat use of
stocked fish to provide status feedback on a time-scale responsive to the information
needs of federal, state, and tribal resource-management agencies.
Field-site Description
The St. Regis River arises in the Adirondacks of New York, northwest of Saranac
Lake village, and flows 129 km generally northwest and north past St. Regis
Falls and into the St. Lawrence River just North of Hogansburg, NY (Fig. 1), in the
section of the St. Lawrence River designated as Lake St. Francis. The St. Regis is
a relatively small river with a 1585-km2 watershed and an average annual flow of
30.3 m3/s, with high average-daily flows of 115–225 m3/s at USGS gage 0426900
Brasher Center. There is a multi-tier waterfall (Brasher Falls) at river kilometer
(rkm) 32.5 (Fig. 1). The river averages 92 m wide and averages 1.9 m deep from
Brasher Falls to the confluence with the St. Lawrence River. Some sections have
maximum depths of >3 m; 1 section has a maximum depth of 8 m. A dam at Rt. 37
in Hogansburg (rkm 4) has blocked most migratory-fish access to this river since
the early 1930s. Brasher Falls is the most-upstream site identified in historical Lake
Sturgeon reports. Carlson (1995) considered Lake Sturgeon to have been restricted
Northeastern Naturalist
706
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015 Vol. 22, No. 4
to this 32-rkm section of the St. Regis River, from the St. Lawrence River south to
Brasher Falls.
Methods
Young-of-year Lake Sturgeon
Young-of–year Lake Sturgeon were hatchery-produced for the restoration stocking.
Resource managers collected adult Lake Sturgeon in the St. Lawrence River
Figure 1. Geographic location of the St. Regis River with river kilometers (rkm) marked
for reference.
Northeastern Naturalist Vol. 22, No. 4
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015
707
near Massena, NY, in the upper part of Lake St. Francis as the source population.
The St. Regis River is in the same genetic-stocking unit as the St. Lawrence River
(Welsh et al. 2014), and is only 15 km from our adult population-sampling site.
NYSDEC Oneida Fish Cultural Station (Constantia, NY) personnel reared juvenile
Lake Sturgeon through the summer and scientists and NYSDEC staff released them
into the target waters in mid-September each year. A total of 4977 Lake Sturgeon
was released in the St. Regis River from 1998 to 2004. Fisheries staff recorded size
(total length [TL], mm) immediately prior to stocking (Table 1). Only the average
lengths at stocking were recorded in the stocking records for the 1998, 1999, and
2000 year-classes.
After 1998, scientists and NYSDEC staff gave the Lake Sturgeon a unique yearclass
(YC) identification mark by removing lateral scutes a minimum of 2 weeks
before release (Table 1). Scute-removal marks can be readily identified for 6–8
years and are in many cases distinguishable for more than 10 years before some of
the scutes grow back or the spiny scutes smooth out and are gradually resorbed as
the fish mature (D. Dittman, pers. observ.; Peterson et al. 2007).
Sturgeon sampling
From June–September 2004 and May–September 2005, we conducted field investigations
to assess presence, movement from release site, body condition, and growth
rates of the Lake Sturgeon released into the St. Regis River. We selected sections of
the river for sampling based on a recovery plan and river-habitat–survey report by
Carlson (2001). The sampled river sections were located from rkm 4.5 upstream of
the Hogansburg Dam to rkm 32, just downstream of the stocking site at Brasher Falls.
In addition, we sampled a ½-km section immediately downstream of the dam (rkm
3–3.5) to detect Lake Sturgeon presence in the unobstructed section of the river, and
to detect any downstream movement of recently stocked fish past the dam. We used
38-m-long x 2.4-m-deep experimental gill nets, with 5 panels of graduated bar-mesh
sizes of 2.54–7.62 cm. This type of net is effective for the capture of fish the size of
typical juvenile Lake Sturgeon (Trested and Isely 2011) and is selective for those sizes
(Haxton et al. 2014). We set the nets at an angle of 45º to the river bank for no more
than 24 h. We measured captured Lake Sturgeon TL to the nearest mm and weight to
the nearest gram. We tagged them with individually numbered Floy® spaghetti tags
(Floy Tag, Inc., Seattle, WA) in the dorsal fin for future individual identification. In
Table 1. Number stocked, marks, average length at release, and calculated survivorship/retention for
year classes of Lake Sturgeon released into the St. Regis River in 2004 and 2005.
Number Average Survivorship/retention
Year released Marks length (SD) 2004 2005
1998 750 None 196 0.67% 0.93%
1999 1200 9th left scute 140 1.00% 0.58%
2000 1027 8th right scute 178 0.78% 0.19%
2003 800 1st and 2nd right 204 (31) 2.10% 1.00%
2004 1200 4th and 5th right 201 (18) - 1.33%
Northeastern Naturalist
708
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015 Vol. 22, No. 4
addition, we photographed all specimens prior to returning them to the river within
25 m of the capture location. We based our age estimates on the scute-mark patterns
(Table 1).
Habitat characterization
We used a habitat-suitability model (HSM) that has been developed for Lake
Sturgeon (Daugherty et al. 2007, Threader et al. 1998). At each habitat-assessment
site, we recorded GPS location, site-location name, and habitat conditions (water
temperature, depth, and velocity, and substrate type). We measured water velocity
at a depth of 1 m from the surface with a Marsh-McBirney current meter (Hach,
Loveland, CO) attached to a cable. We conducted substrate sampling with a petite
Ponar (Wildco®, Yulee, FL) sampler and based our determination of sediment type
on a modified Wentworth particle-size scale (Wentworth 1922).
Data analysis
For catch metrics, we calculated the total number of Lake Sturgeon captured per
night/per net in each assessed river section and the average number of sturgeon/net
night over the 2 years for each assessed river section. We also determined minimal
survival/retention rate of the released fish (S = (n/N) x 100) for each year-class
(Mohler et al. 2012), where n is the number captured in either 2004 or 2005 of each
year class and N is the number released of that year class. This value represents
a survival/retention rate because juvenile sturgeon tend to gradually move downstream
in tributaries toward larger waters (Acolas et al. 2012, Benson et al. 2005).
To apply the Lake Sturgeon HSM to the habitat available to juvenile Lake Sturgeon
in the assessed sections of the St Regis River, we collected specific habitat
data as mentioned above (Daugherty et al. 2007, Haxton et al. 2008). These standard
HSM variables were fitted to a suitability curve with values between 0–1. The
habitat-suitability index for each assessment location consist of the geometric mean
of the variable index-values from multiple samples within the assessment area.
Mean index values close to 1 indicate good habitat, while values closer to 0 indicate
poor habitat.
We calculated average size-at-age for each year class (August/September) in
2004 and 2005. We determined best-fit equations for TL and weight data of all
Lake Sturgeon captured during 2004 and 2005, with the regression coefficient as an
indicator of the rate increase in weight (Jackson et al. 2002). We derived averagegrowth
rates from observed length-at-age data. We calculated the relative-condition
factor for each Lake Sturgeon as: Kn = W/a (TL) n, where W is weight (kg), TL is
total length (mm), and a and n are the respective intercept and slope of the log10-
transformed TL and weight data (Lallaman et al. 2008).
Results
Presence and distribution
We captured a total of 95 different Lake Sturgeon over the 2 years in the target
river reaches upstream of the Hogansburg dam, with 8 recaptures in 2004 and 5 in
Northeastern Naturalist Vol. 22, No. 4
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015
709
2005. We captured representatives of all of the released year classes in both 2004
and 2005. Minimum survival rates ranged from 2.1% for 1-y-old fish released in
2003 to 0.19% for 5-y-old fish released in 2000 (T able 1).
We captured juvenile Lake Sturgeon in all of the assessment sections (Fig 2).
The sites with the highest-capture rates were at rkm 30 and 32 (catch rate = 1.7
and 0.96 sturgeon/net night, respectively) and rkm 22.5 (catch rate = 0.74 sturgeon/
net/night) (Table 2, Fig. 2). The lowest-catch rate was downstream of the
dam at rkm 3.0–3.2 (0.03 sturgeon/net/night), where we captured only 1 Lake
Sturgeon over the 2 years. The HSM results indicated that good juvenile habitat
occurred between rkm 30 and 32, just downstream of the stocking site (Table 2).
Figure 2. Catch numbers (squares, right axis) and sizes (bars, left axis) of Lake Sturgeon
captured in target river reaches, 2004–2005. Average length (diamonds) and weights
(striped) ± SD are shown for each reach.
Table 2. Catch rates and Lake Sturgeon habitat-suitability-model index values in the river sections
assessed for Lake Sturgeon. *indicates catch rate within 100 m of the stocking site in the first month
after stocking.
Average catch (SD)
River Section (rkm) Lake Sturgeon/net/night Total nets HSI
3–3.2 0.06 (0.11) 32 -
5–6 0.22 (0.26) 40 0.887
10–13 0.54 (0.74) 16 0.897
22–23 0.74 (0.58) 27 0.586
30 1.70 (1.62) 41 0.894
32 1.92 (1.13)* 9 0.929
Northeastern Naturalist
710
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015 Vol. 22, No. 4
At 3–8 m deep, this section had greater maximum depths than the other sampled
river sections, slow flow, and mixed substrate—mostly coarse sand. We captured
the largest Lake Sturgeon between rkm 11 and 14 in areas with depths of 1.5–2 m
over coarse sand (Fig. 2). One-y-old fish (released the previous September) were
the most commonly caught age in both 2004 and 2005 (Table 3). The majority of
captures in the upper river closest to the release site were from the 2003 YC and
2004 YC (data not shown). The only Lake Sturgeon we observed downstream of
the Hogansburg dam was a 2003 release caught in July of 2005. The most-sparse
year/catch/age combination was the 2 individuals of the 2000 YC (5-y-old) fish
caught in 2005 (Table 3).
Growth and condition
Average stocked Lake Sturgeon TL was 204 mm and 201 mm (SD = 18) and average
weight was 40.1 g and 37.7 g (SD = 9) in 2003 and 2004, respectively. The sizes of
Lake Sturgeon released in 2003 and 2004 were not significantly different (t-test, P =
0.29). We caught 14 of the newly stocked individuals 2 weeks after release in 2004.
Their average length was 217 mm (SD = 12) and average weight was 40.4 g (SD = 8).
They were already significantly longer than the size at stocking (t-test, P = 0.0002).
Juvenile Lake Sturgeon growth rates ranged from 93.7 mm/y (1998 YC) to 112.2
mm/y (1999 YC) and averaged 105.1 mm/y for all 5 year classes. The average sizeat-
age in 2004 ranged from age 1 = 354 mm and 156 g, to age 6 = 704 mm and
1695 g, and in 2005 ranged from age 1 = 305 mm and 104 g to age 7 = 758 mm
and 2133 g) (Table 3). The average 1st-year growth of the 2003 YC was 150 mm and
115.6 g as measured in September 2004. Relative condition-at-age was fairly high,
ranging from 0.908 to 1.081 (Table 3). The overall length–weight relationships
(W = c × Lx) of the captured fish were very similar between years (Fig. 3). The
regression coefficient for the log-transformed length–weight equation was 3.11 in
2004 and 3.27 in 2005.
Table 3. Lake Sturgeon average size and relative condition of each year class released in August and
September of 2004 and 2005. Kn = relative condition factor.
Year class (n) Age (y) Length (mm) Weight (g) Kn
2004
1998 (4) 6 704 1695 1.081
1999 (11) 5 633 1159 1.036
2000 (5) 4 580 828 0.973
2003 (13) 1 354 156 0.908
2004 (14) 0 217 40 1.047
2005
1998 (6) 7 758 2133 1.005
1999 (4) 6 701 1566 1.022
2000 (2) 5 604 945 0.966
2003 (6) 2 422 311 0.985
2004 (11) 1 305 104 0.999
Northeastern Naturalist Vol. 22, No. 4
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015
711
Discussion
We found that all year classes of released juvenile Lake Sturgeon were present
in the St. Regis River, indicating intermediate success for the reintroduction. However,
the data also reflect only a modest level of survival and retention in the target
restoration area. Minimum-survival rate is a valuable metric in the assessment of
hatchery-produced fish (Mohler et al. 2012). Catch rate is often used as a metric
of local Lake Sturgeon presence (Haxton 2011) with 0.01 sturgeon/net/night often
set as a benchmark in sturgeon-population assessment and recovery-index metrics
(COSEWIC 2006, Schram et al 1999). Catch rates are often much higher in wellestablished
self-reproducing populations (Barth et al. 2009, Haxton et al. 2008).
Our catch values, ranging from 0.05 to 1.7 sturgeon/net/night lie within the range
of those reported for Lake Sturgeon populations in tributaries of the Great Lakes
and connecting channels (Haxton 2011, Lallaman et al. 2008, Schram et al 1999).
The low sturgeon/net/night value of 0.05 in the area downstream of the Hogansburg
Dam perhaps reflects continuing movement of any downstream-moving Lake
Sturgeon out of the tributary toward the larger water body (Benson et al. 2005).
Trested and Isely (2011) reported catch values of 0.2 to 0.5 sturgeon/net/night in
the nearby small Grasse River, NY, population, although caution must be taken in
comparing catch rates in a river stocked with young hatchery-reared fish with one
that is reported to have a small self-reproducing population.
Figure 3. Length–weight relationships for Lake Sturgeon captured in the St. Regis River.
Late summer 2004 best fit equation: W = (2.0 x 10-6) x L3.11, n = 47 (solid line). Late summer
2005 best fit equation: W = (8.0 x 10-7) x L3.27, n = 29 (dashed line).
Northeastern Naturalist
712
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015 Vol. 22, No. 4
The majority of the Lake Sturgeon captured in both 2004 and 2005 were in the
deepest parts of each sampled river reach (1.5–9 m deep). These released Lake
Sturgeon are using the barrier-isolated section of the St. Regis River habitat in a
manner consistent with standard habitat-suitability predictions for Lake Sturgeon
up to 8 y old (Barth et al. 2009, Daugherty et al. 2007, Haxton 2011, Haxton et al.
2008). Our data show that the youngest fish are most common closest to the stocking
sites and the older-aged classes are further downstream. This pattern is
consistent with the observations from recent studies that some proportion of released
young Lake Sturgeon tend to remain in localized areas (Barth et al. 2009,
Haxton 2011), while some move downstream (Benson et al. 2005, Wilson and
McKinley 2004). Sites with higher juvenile residence (as reflected in the catch rate)
in the St. Regis River had sandy substrates with some gravel, which is also consistent
with studies on juvenile Lake Sturgeon habitat preference (Benson et al. 2005,
Haxton 2011). Similar to our findings, Haxton et al. (2008) found some, but not
high correspondence, between HMS results and catch rate. The site at rkm 22.5 with
lower correspondence of catch and suitability had mixed substrate and variable flow
conditions. It is probable that our sampling of habitat preference and modeling in a
highly variable habitat in a given river reach is of a different scale or grain size than
the real-time dynamic-habitat selection of an individual Lake Sturgeon. The relatively
low sample-size of Lake Sturgeon in each of the assessment sections
precluded finer discrimination of habitats within the sites as was done in the Ottawa
River and other rivers (Daugherty et al. 2007, Haxton et al. 20 08).
The size-at-age of Lake Sturgeon we recorded in the St. Regis River was within
the size ranges observed elsewhere for similar-aged juvenile Lake Sturgeon (Jackson
et al. 2002, Probst and Cooper 1955). In Lake Winnebago, an average TL of
5-y-old fish was 664 mm (Bruch et al 2011); while we found that an average TL
of 5-y-old Lake Sturgeon was 619 mm in the St. Regis River. In the St. Lawrence
and lower Ottawa rivers near Montreal, the range of mean reported TL for 2–10 yold
Lake Sturgeon was 388–801 mm (Fortin et al. 1993). Lengths of 7-y-old St.
Regis Lake Sturgeon approached the upper range of these lengths. Growth-regression
coefficients, which relate rate of weight gain with length, were 3.11 for 2004
and 3.27 for 2005 in our study, consistent with growth patterns reported in other
waters. For example, Trested and Isely (2011) reported a coefficient of 3.202 in the
Grasse River. Lallaman et al. (2008) found a growth coefficient of 3.17 for Lake
Sturgeon in the Manistee River, Bruch et al. (2011) calculated a growth coefficient
of 3.19 for less than 71-cm Lake Sturgeon in Wisconsin. Jackson et al. (2002) reported a
regression coefficient of 3.63 for stocked sturgeon in Oneida Lake, which represents
a fast weight-gain, and Probst and Cooper (1955) reported a growth coefficient of
3.30 for Lake Sturgeon captured before 1955 in Lake Winnebago. The observed
size-at-age, growth coefficients, and condition-index values for the Lake Sturgeon
in the St. Regis River are evidence that the average stocking rate of 30/rkm/year did
not have a negative effect on the growth rates and health of the released Lake Sturgeon;
the recommended stocking rate in some restoration programs is 50/rkm/year
for 20–25 years (Smith and Hobden 2011, WIDNR 2000). The St. Regis River
Northeastern Naturalist Vol. 22, No. 4
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015
713
stocking duration and total number released is consistent with some of the current
recommendations for pulse stocking as a supplementation strategy (Schueller and
Hayes 2011, Welsh and Jackson 2014).
Lake Sturgeon released in the St. Louis River, WI, started to leave the river after
about 5 y, descended into Lake Superior, and spread out along the nearshore area
(Schram et al. 1999), while juvenile Lake Sturgeon in the Pestigo River left by fall
of the same year, moving into Green Bay (Benson et al. 2005). Consequently, it is
likely that some of the Lake Sturgeon that were released into the St. Regis River
will move downstream past the dam at Hogansburg and then enter the St. Lawrence
River as they grow and mature, supplementing the depleted Lake St. Francis
population (Mailhot et al. 2011). Ongoing assessments are needed to determine
the long-term status of the St. Regis River as suitable habitat to support the establishment
of a local tributary Lake Sturgeon population as is present in the nearby
Grasse River (Trested and Isely 2011). There is growing support for removal of
the dam in Hogansburg, NY—the barrier to fish passage—as a management action
(Erie Boulevard Hydropower 2010). Similar to several recovery programs for this
species across the Great Lakes Basin (Mailhot et al. 2011, Velez-Espino and Koops
2009, WIDNR 2000), a critical component of restoration success will be natural
reproduction when fish reach maturity (18–25 years). Assessment and monitoring
to detect intermediate-success thresholds for restoration goals (Auer 2004, Ireland
et al. 2002, Lintermans 2013) is becoming a more common component of nativespecies
restoration plans.
Measuring these several positive intermediate Lake Sturgeon metrics—postrelease
survival/presence, growth, and habitat use—of juvenile Lake Sturgeon
stocked into the St. Regis River is a judicious step in facilitating the adaptive management
of the species’ recovery in the St. Lawrence River ecosystem. Managers
need this type of information to evaluate restoration-program decisions on a 2–5-y
timeframe so they can determine the optimal timing and levels of further stocking
efforts (Welsh and Jackson 2014). The intermediate program-status–metrics information
can also provide a comparative framework for future studies that will be
carried out to facilitate the recovery of this important native species. Data provided
by these studies will expedite the formulation of more-effective management plans
for Lake Sturgeon throughout its native range and especially in New York State and
shared international waters (Pegasov 2009, Pollock et al. 2014, Seddon et al. 2006,
Velez-Espino and Koops 2009).
Acknowledgments
Thanks for invaluable assistance with field-work, laboratory work, and analysis go to
D. Carlson, R. McDonald, P. Randall, A. Reese, T. Wallbridge, USGS seasonal personnel,
and NYSDEC field and hatchery personnel. Major funding was provided by the USEPA
Interagency Agreement Number DW-14-94806801-0. This article is Contribution 1967 of
the US Geological Survey, Great Lakes Science Center, Cortland, NY.
Northeastern Naturalist
714
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015 Vol. 22, No. 4
Literature Cited
Acolas, M.L., E. Rochard, C. Le Pichon, and E. Rouleau. 2012. Downstream migration
patterns of one-year-old hatchery-reared European sturgeon (Acipenser sturio). Journal
of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 430–431:68–77.
Auer, N.A. 2004. Conservation. Pp. 252–276, In G.T.O. LeBreton, F.W.H. Beamish, and
R.S. McKinley (Eds.) Sturgeon and Paddlefish of North America. Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 323 pp.
Barth, C.C., S.J. Peake, P.J. Allen, and W.G. Anderson. 2009. Habitat utilization of juvenile
Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in a large Canadian river. Journal of Applied
Ichthyology 25:18–26.
Bemis, W.E., and B. Kynard. 1997. Sturgeon rivers: An introduction to Acipenseriform
biogeography and life history. Environmental Biology of Fishes 48:167–183.
Benson, A.C., T.M. Sutton, R.F. Elliott, and T.G. Meronek. 2005. Seasonal-movement
patterns and habitat preferences of age-0 Lake Sturgeon in the lower Peshtigo River,
Wisconsin. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 134:1400–1409.
Bruch, R.M., and F.P. Binkowski. 2002. Spawning behavior of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser
fulvescens). Journal of Applied Ichthyology 18:570–57.
Bruch, R.M., K.K. Kamke and T. Haxton. 2011. Use of a modified form factor to compare
condition among North American Lake Sturgeon stocks. Journal of Applied Ichthyology
27:34–40.
Carlson, D.M. 1995. Lake Sturgeon waters and fisheries in New York State. Journal of
Great Lakes Research 21:35–41.
Carlson, D.M. 2000. A recovery plan for the Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in New
York. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY. 16 pp.
Carlson, D.M. 2001. Lake Sturgeon recovery plan for the St. Regis River. Department of
Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY. 3 pp.
Committee on the Status of Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 2006. COSEWIC assessment
and update status report on the Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens, in Canada.
Available online at http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/cosewic/sr_Lake_
Sturgeon_0807_e.pdf. Accessed 20 February 2015.
Daugherty, D.J., T.M. Sutton, and R.F. Elliott. 2007. Potential for reintroduction of Lake
Sturgeon in five northern Lake Michigan tributaries: A habitat-suitability perspective.
Aquatic Conservation. Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 18:692–7 02.
Erie Boulevard Hydropower. 2010. Hogansburg Hydroelectric Project (FERC
NO. 7518). Available online at http://www.srmtenv.org/web_docs/WRP/
HogansburgPAD_20100929webcopy.pdf. Accessed 15 February 2013.
Fortin, R., J. Mongeau, G. Desjardins, and P. Dumont. 1993. Movements and biological
statistics of Lake Sturgeon populations from the St. Lawrence and Ottawa River system,
Quebec. Canadian Journal of Zoology 71:638–650.
Harkness, W.J.K., and J.R. Dymond. 1961. The Lake Sturgeon: The history of its fishery
and problems of conservation. Fish and Wildlife Branch, Ontario Department of Lands
and Forests, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Haxton, T. 2011. Depth selectivity and spatial distribution of juvenile Lake Sturgeon in a
large, fragmented river. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 27:45–52.
Haxton, T.J., C.S. Findlay, and R.W. Threader. 2008. Predictive value of a Lake Sturgeon
habitat-suitability model. North American Journal of Fisheries Management
28:1373–1383.
Northeastern Naturalist Vol. 22, No. 4
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015
715
Haxton, T., M. Friday, T. Cano, and C. Hendry. 2014. Evaluation of a netting protocol to
quantitatively assess Lake Sturgeon in Ontario rivers. Aquatic Research and Monitoring
Section, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Minden, ON, Can ada. 12 pp.
Holzkamm, T.E., and L.G. Waisberg. 2004. Native American utilization of sturgeon. Pp.
22–39, In Sturgeons and Paddlefish of North America. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
323 pp.
Ireland, S.C., P.J. Anders, and J.T. Siple. 2002. Conservation aquaculture: An adaptive approach
to prevent extinction of an endangered White Sturgeon population. American
Fisheries Society Symposium 28:211–222.
Jackson, J.R., A.J. Van DeValk, T.E. Brooking, O.A. van Keeken, and L.G. Rudstrom. 2002.
Growth and feeding dynamics of Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens, in Oneida Lake,
New York: Results from the first five years of a restoration program. Journal of Applied
Ichthyology 18:439–443.
Lallaman, J.J., R.A. Damstra, and T.L. Galarowicz. 2008. Population assessment and movement
patterns of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) in the Manistee River, Michigan,
USA. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 24:1–6.
LaPan, S.R., A. Mathers, T.J. Stewart, R.E. Lange, and S.D. Orsatti. 2002. Fish-community
objectives for the St. Lawrence River. Great Lakes Fisheries Commission Special Publication
02, Ann Arbor, MI. 27 pp.
Lintermans, M. 2013. A review of on-ground recovery actions for threatened freshwater fish
in Australia. Marine and Freshwater Research 64:775–791.
Mailhot, Y., P. Dumont, and N. Vachon. 2011. Management of the Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser
fulvescens) population in the lower St Lawrence River (Quebec, Canada) from the 1910s
to the present. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 27:404–410.
Mohler, J.W., J.A. Sweka, A. Kahnle, K. Hattala, A. Higgs, M. DuFour, M.W. Breece, and
D.A. Fox. 2012. Growth and survival of hatchery-produced Atlantic Sturgeon released
as young-of-year into the Hudson River, New York. Journal of Wildlife Management
3:23–32.
Pegasov, V.A. 2009. The ecological problems of introduction and reintroduction of sturgeons.
Pp. 339–343, In R. Carmona, A. Domezain, M. Garcia Gallego, J. Hernando-
Casal, F. Rodriguez, and M. Ruiz Rejon (Eds.). Biology, Conservation, and Sustainable
Development of Sturgeons. Springer, New York, NY. 357 pp.
Peterson, D.L., P. Vecsei, and C.A. Jennings. 2007. Ecology and biology of the Lake Sturgeon:
A synthesis of current knowledge of a threatened North American Acipenseridae.
Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 17:59–76.
Pikitch, E.K., P. Doukakis, L. Lauck, P. Chakrabarty, and D.L. Erickson. 2005. Status,
trends, and management of sturgeon and paddlefish fisheries. Fish and Fisheries 6:233–
265.
Pollock, M.S., M. Carr, N.M. Kreitals, and I.D. Phillips. 2014. Review of a species in
peril: What we do not know about Lake Sturgeon may kill them. Environmental Review
23:1–14.
Probst, R.T., and E.L. Cooper. 1955. Age, growth, and production of the Lake Sturgeon
(Acipenser fulvescens) in the Lake Winnebago region, Wisconsin. Transactions of the
American Fisheries Society 84:207–227.
Schram, S.T., J. Lindgren, and L.M. Evrard. 1999. Reintroduction of Lake Sturgeon in the
St. Louis River, western Lake Superior. North American Journal of Fisheries Management
19:815–823.
Northeastern Naturalist
716
D.E. Dittman, M.A. Chalupnicki, J.H. Johnson, and J. Snyder
2015 Vol. 22, No. 4
Schueller, A.M., and D.B. Hayes. 2011. Inbreeding and allele retention for Lake Sturgeon
populations under different supplementation strategies. North American Journal of Fisheries
Management 31:1133–1145.
Seddon, P.J., D.P. Armstrong, and R.F. Maloney. 2006. Developing the science of reintroduction
biology. Conservation Biology 21:303–312.
Smith, A.L., and D. Hobden. 2011. A synopsis of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens)
culture, marking, and stocking techniques. Biodiversity Branch. Ontario Ministry of
Natural Resources. Peterborough, ON, Canada. Available online at http://www.fws.
gov/midwest/sturgeon/documents/smith-hobden-2011-culture-stocking.pdf. Accessed
20 February 2015.
Threader, R.W., R.J. Pope, and P.R.H. Schaap. 1998. Development of a habitat-suitabilityindex
model for Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens). Ontario Hydro report number
H-07015.01-0012, Toronto, ON. Canada.
Trested, D.G., and J.J. Isely. 2011. Age, growth, mortality, and abundance of Lake Sturgeon
in the Grasse River, New York, USA. Journal of Applied Ichthyology 27:13–19.
Velez-Espino, L., and M. Koops. 2009. Recovery-potential assessment for Lake Sturgeon
in Canadian Designatable Units. North American Journal of Fisheries Management
29:1065–1090.
Welsh, A.B., and J.R. Jackson. 2014. The effect of multi-year vs. single-year stocking on
Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens Rafinesque, 1817) genetic diversity. Journal of
Applied Ichthyology 30:1524–1530.
Wentworth, C.K. 1922. A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments. Journal of
Geology 30:377–392.
Wilson, J., and R. McKinley. 2004. Distribution, habitat, and movements. Pp. 40–72, In
G.T.O. LeBreton, F.W.H. Beamish, and R.S. McKinley (Eds.). Sturgeon and Paddlefish
of North America. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 323 pp.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WIDNR). 2000. Wisconsin’s Lake Sturgeon
Management Plan. Available online at http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/fishing/documents/sturgeon/
lsturmplan_eversion.pdf. Accessed 20 February 2015.