Notes

Discovery of an Undocumented Lake Sturgeon SpawningSite in the Headwaters of the Niagara RiverRachel D. Neuenhoff, Jonah L. Withers, Lori A. Davis, Nicholas D. Markley, Stephanie Dowell, Meredith L.Bartron, Dimitry Gorsky, John A. Sweka*

R.D. Neuenhoff, J.L. Withers, L.A. Davis, N.D. Markley, S. Dowell, M.L. Bartron, J.A. SwekaU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Northeast Fishery Center, 308 Washington Avenue, Lamar, Pennsylvania 16848

D. GorskyU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Lower Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office, 1101 Casey Road, Basom, NewYork 14013

Abstract

Information about spawning fish is important to stock-assessment data needs (i.e., recruitment and fecundity) andmanagement (i.e., habitat connectivity and protection). In Lake Erie, information about Lake Sturgeon Acipenserfulvescens early-life history is available for the Detroit River and Lake St. Clair system in the western basin, but fisheriesbiologists know comparatively little about Lake Sturgeon in the eastern basin. Although researchers have summarizedhistorical spawning areas, no known natural Lake Sturgeon spawning site is described in Lake Erie proper. Researchersdocumented a remnant population of reproductively mature Lake Sturgeon near the headwaters of the Niagara Riverin eastern Lake Erie in 2011. Researchers hypothesized that a spawning site was likely in the immediate vicinity of theNiagara River headwaters near Buffalo Harbor, New York; however, its exact location was unknown. We attempted tolocate spawning sites near the confluence of the Niagara River using egg traps at three potential spawning sites. Weidentified Lake Sturgeon eggs at one of these sites using morphological and genetic techniques. Lake Sturgeon eggscollected on one sampling trip began to emerge when placed in preservative, confirming that eggs deposited at thissite are fertilized and viable, and that the area supports viable embryos. This discovery fills data gaps in the early-lifehistory for this population, which has domestic and international management implications with respect to proposedrecovery targets, stock assessment models, habitat remediation efforts, and status determinations of a protectedspecies in a geographic region designated as an Area of Concern by the International Joint Commission.

Keywords: Acipenser; early-life history; egg traps; Lake Erie; Lake Sturgeon; spawning site; Niagara River

Received: October 30, 2017; Accepted: February 14, 2018; Published Online Early: February 2018; Published: June 2018

Citation: Neuenhoff RD, Withers JL, Davis LA, Markley ND, Dowell S, Bartron ML, Gorsky D, Sweka, JA. 2018. Discovery ofan undocumented Lake Sturgeon spawning site in the headwaters of the Niagara River. Journal of Fish and WildlifeManagement 9(1):266–273; e1944-687X. doi: 10.3996/102017-JFWM-087

Copyright: All material appearing in the Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management is in the public domain and may bereproduced or copied without permission unless specifically noted with the copyright symbol &. Citation of thesource, as given above, is requested.

The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of theU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

* Corresponding author: john_sweka@fws.gov

Introduction

Lake Sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens are the largestand longest-lived freshwater fish endemic to NorthAmerica, and have suffered precipitous populationdeclines throughout their distribution (Scott and Cross-man 1973; Pikitch et al. 2005). Detailed accounts of Lake

Sturgeon declines in Lake Erie implicate the commercialfishery of the late 1800s to early 1900s (Koelz 1925).Population recovery failure in the following century hasbeen linked to migratory barriers, changes in waterquality, pollution (Rochard et al. 1990; Auer 1996),invasive species, and degradation of nearshore spawn-ing and nursery environments (Koonce et al. 1996).

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management | www.fwspubs.org June 2018 | Volume 9 | Issue 1 | 266

Additionally, the species’ life history characteristics ofslow growth, delayed maturation, infrequent spawningperiodicity, and a generally skewed sex ratio presum-ably exacerbated population declines and slowedrecovery (Golder Associates Ltd. 2011). Contemporaryrecovery strategies are predicated on habitat remedia-tion, reduction of legacy pollutants, elevated publicawareness, and improved ecological function (IJC 2012;Lake Erie LaMP 2002; Golder Associates Ltd. 2011).However, important information gaps, particularly withrespect to the early-life history of Lake Sturgeon, limitthe efficiency and implementation of current recoverystrategies.

While researchers have well documented detailedinformation pertaining to Lake Sturgeon life history inother regions of Lake Erie (McKinley et al. 1998; Hugheset al. 2011), information on the Lake Sturgeonpopulation(s) of the eastern basin of Lake Erie isparticularly limited. Spawning locations in the easternbasin are unknown and early-life history information isdata deficient. In 2014, multiple agencies initiated abroad scope to quantitatively describe life historyparameters of eastern Lake Erie Lake Sturgeon. Thepresent study describes an ancillary goal to fill datagaps related to early-life history of eastern Lake ErieLake Sturgeon by identifying one or more spawningsites at the headwaters of the Niagara River wheresexually mature adult Lake Sturgeon are known tocongregate annually during the spawning period. Bydescribing the discovery of areas where we observedLake Sturgeon egg deposition near the upper NiagaraRiver, we fill data gaps emphasized in the New YorkState (NYSDEC 2017) and Ontario (Golder Associates

Ltd. 2011) recovery plans for Lake Sturgeon. Thisprovides baseline knowledge about Lake Sturgeonspawning locations where management agencies canfocus habitat assessment and remediation efforts—elements that are emphasized in both recovery plans.Our spatial observations also provide explicit informa-tion about where researchers should direct surveyefforts for eggs, larvae, and juveniles in the upperNiagara River. Lastly, this discovery serves as the firstreported area of Lake Sturgeon egg deposition for theentire eastern basin of Lake Erie.

Lake Sturgeon in eastern Lake Erie have only beencaptured in an area southwest of Horseshoe Reef andthe Black Rock Lock Canal Entrance Channel (Figure 1),locally known as the North Gap (Legard 2015) near theBuffalo Harbor. Unfortunately, knowledge gaps aboutthe location of suitable Lake Sturgeon spawning andrearing habitat features near the headwaters of theNiagara River (see Golder Associates Ltd. 2011) narrowour understanding of potential habitat variables drivingadult Lake Sturgeon aggregating behaviors. Documen-tation of spawning location is important for identifying,protecting, or improving Lake Sturgeon habitat. Todate, researchers have identified no suitable spawningor rearing habitats in the headwaters to the NiagaraRiver. In the present study, we describe a broadenedresearch approach to detect Lake Sturgeon spawningareas in the headwaters of the Niagara River using eggtraps to capture Lake Sturgeon eggs at several sites inthe immediate vicinity of the adult capture site. Wediscuss the results in the context of recovery manage-ment implications and future research needs.

Figure 1. Map of study area: headwaters of the Niagara River and adult Lake Sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens capture site during theannual Lake Sturgeon spawning run in May and June of 2017. The spring-spawning Lake Sturgeon adult capture site from 2012–2017 encompassed by the polygon at (C). We chose three strata based on habitat characteristics consistent with Lake Sturgeonspawning preferences such as depths , 4m, gravel-dominated substrate, and relatively high velocity flows. Locations from north tosouth: Bird Island Reef (A), Middle Reef (B), and the North Gap break wall area (C) at the south end of the North Gap region. Thecircles indicate location of egg trap sets and the triangles indicate locations where egg traps contained Lake Sturgeon.

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management | www.fwspubs.org June 2018 | Volume 9 | Issue 1 | 267

Lake Sturgeon Spawning Site in the Niagara River R.D. Neuenhoff et al.

Study Area

The headwaters of the Niagara River are fed by easternLake Erie waters flowing north into a shallow outerharbor proximate to a lock system known as Black RockLock. The western extent belongs to Canada and theeastern, to the United States (Figure 1). The upperNiagara River is approximately 35 river kilometersupstream and south of Niagara Falls. The river feedsinto the Niagara escarpment, over Niagara Falls, andthrough the Niagara Gorge, a geologic feature createdby the gradual recession of the falls since the last ice age(Calkin and Brett 1978).

The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (US EPA2015) identifies the Niagara River as an Area of Concern.This designation signifies that certain beneficial uses ofthe Niagara River have become impaired due toanthropogenic factors, most notably postindustrial wastewith prolonged degradation times and destruction ofhabitat. The International Joint Commission identifiedthe Niagara River as having 6 of the possible 14Beneficial Use Impairments, including fish and wildlifehabitat degradation and population loss, and reproduc-tive impairments due to the deteriorated biological andphysical environment (IJC 2012). Within the Niagara RiverArea of Concern, many contaminated sites occur alongthe eastern branch of the upper Niagara River extendingfrom Niagara Falls and proceeding south along the locksystem to the area known as South Gap in Lake Erieproper (IJC 2012). Hereafter, we refer to the study area asthe headwaters of the Niagara River. This area is ofparticular importance from several perspectives: 1) thearea supports an extant Lake Sturgeon population ofunknown abundance and trend (LELSWG 2016; Legard2015) that was historically referenced at the height ofcommercial exploitation (Koelz 1925); 2) the upperNiagara River region represents a high priority in thecontext of environmental habitat degradation, speciesecology, and native species restoration (IJC 2012); 3) thearea is an interface between limnic Lake Erie proper andshallow, fast-flowing, riverine waters—features consis-tent with Lake Sturgeon spawning preferences (Bruchand Binkowski 2002; Johnson et al. 2006); and 4) there isconsiderable international interest in the area as a sharedconnecting waterway between Lake Erie and LakeOntario, and as such management decisions are subjectto a collaborative process between the United States andCanada per existing ratified treaties (Root and Bryce1910).

Methods

We sampled with egg traps at several sites in theheadwaters of the Niagara River. We based site selectionon published accounts of Lake Sturgeon spawninghabitat preferences. Criteria are outlined by Johnson etal. (2006): shallow in depth (, 4 m) with substratedominated by gravel in areas of high flow (. 0.4 m/s).We initially identified six potential spawning habitats inour study area that met most of these criteria based onprofessional judgement. Specifically, we looked for

shallow areas (, 4 m) where passive boat drift wasrapid relative to other areas investigated, though we didnot quantitatively measure current velocity. We choselocations dominated by gravel substrate. We alsoconsidered the presence of reproductively mature LakeSturgeon. Due to logistical limitations, mainly concernfor the researchers’ safety in swifter current in themainstem, we eliminated three candidate locations andwere left with three sites occurring within 2 kmdownstream of the adult capture site near the NorthGap. One of these sites, the North Gap break wall area(Figure 1), did not meet the depth or qualitative flowcriteria but we retained it due to the prevalence ofexpressing, reproductively mature adults in the immedi-ate vicinity. We used ArcMap 10.4.1 for Desktop (ESRI2015) to generate polygons of our three sites using abathymetry raster of the river confluence (NOAA 2017).These polygons corresponded to Bird Island Reef(221,745.93 m2), Middle Reef (84,904.98 m2), and theNorth Gap break wall area (11,815.21 m2; Figure 1).

We used standard furnace filter (HD Supply, 6.1 3 110m) to construct egg traps secured to welded steel framessimilar to the design of Nichols et al. (2003). We deployedour traps in groups of three connected by a polypropyl-ene line (i.e., a ‘‘gang’’), with each downstream end ofthe gang attached to a buoy (~ 6 kg buoyancy) by astainless steel cable (6–15 m long depending on waterdepth). The upstream end attached to a 4.5-kg clawanchor. We deployed gangs when water temperature atdepth reached 108C prior to the observed Lake Sturgeonrun in May when researchers typically observe andcapture mature individuals at the North Gap area. Wesampled with egg trap gangs for 6 wk, approximately theduration of the spawning run (based on observations inprevious years). These seasonal parameters coincidedwith the documented spawning temperature preferencebetween 9 and 218C documented for the Winnebagosystem (Bruch and Binkowski 2002). Although we did notmeasure actual water velocities, we observed differencesin passive boat drift at different sites during the vesselsurvey. Depth also differed among sites ranging fromapproximately 2 to 6 m. Substrate composition appearedto qualitatively differ among locations based on ourprofessional judgement with sampled sites being dom-inated by gravel and cobble (3-cm) substrate.

We deployed and retrieved gangs of egg traps once aweek at each site. Placement each week was haphazardat each site due to difficulties maneuvering samplingvessels into shallow, fast-moving waters. Deployment bywading was logistically infeasible and determined to beunsafe. The number of gangs that we deployed wasroughly proportional to the area of identified habitat,(i.e., we deployed more gangs at larger sites and fewer atsmaller sites). We deployed five gangs on Bird IslandReef, five gangs on Middle Reef, and two gangs near theNorth Gap break wall per week. This corresponded toweekly egg trap areas of 3.47 m2 at Bird Island Reef andMiddle Reef and 1.39 m2 at the North Gap break wall persampling week. Upon retrieval, we removed the furnacefilter from frames, placed each filter in a separate plastic

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management | www.fwspubs.org June 2018 | Volume 9 | Issue 1 | 268

Lake Sturgeon Spawning Site in the Niagara River R.D. Neuenhoff et al.

189-L plastic bag, labeled, and affixed a new piece offurnace filter to each frame prior to redeployment.

We examined the retrieved furnace filter material forthe presence of eggs following collection. We removedall observed eggs with forceps and placed them in 15-mLfalcon tubes with 95% nondenatured ethanol. Weidentified Lake Sturgeon eggs based on morphologicaltraits (sensu Wang et al. 1985; Eckes et al. 2015). Of thetraps from which we collected putative Lake Sturgeoneggs, we selected one to two eggs per trap for geneticspecies identification to validate morphological identifi-cation. To minimize the risk of external contaminationand polymerase chain reaction (PCR) inhibition, weremoved the egg membrane and extracted DNA fromthe inner contents of each egg using the Chelex method.We submerged the egg material in 190 lL of a solutioncontaining 5% Chelex 100 resin beads and 2% proteinaseK. After a 3-h incubation at 558C, we heated the samplesat 1058C for 8 min, and vortexed and centrifuged them.We removed the supernatant containing the DNA andused it directly in PCR.

We sequenced a 652-bp region of the mitochondrialcytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene. The COI geneis the basis for the Barcode of Life database, whichcontains sequence data to a wide variety of referencespecies. We amplified the 652-bp COI region usinguniversal fish primers (Univ_Fish_F and Univ_Fish_R)designed by Shokralla et al. (2015). Each 25-lL PCRreaction contained 2 lL of the undiluted DNA extract, 4.5lL PCR buffer (53), 2.5 lL MgCl2 (25 mM), 0.5 lL dNTPs(10 mM), 0.25 lL of each primer (10 lM), and 0.125 lLTaq polymerase (5 units/lL). The thermal profile consist-ed of an initial denaturation step of 948C for 2 min,followed by 35 cycles of 948C for 30 s, 548C for 40 s, and728C for 1 min, and a final extension step of 728C for 10min. We then visualized the PCR products on a 2%agarose gel to confirm amplification success. We labeledPCR products using the BigDye Terminator version 3.1Cycle Sequencing Kit (Applied Biosystems, Inc.) andbidirectionally sequenced them on an ABI 3130 capillarysequencer. We inspected chromatograms and assembledthem into contigs in Sequencher version 4.5 (GeneCodesCorp.). We aligned the resulting sequence data againstreference sequences in the National Center for Biotech-nology Information database using the nucleotide BasicLocal Alignment Search Tool for highly similar sequences(Altschul et al. 1990). Additionally, the sequences werealigned to the Barcode of Life Database, version 3, bysearching the species-level barcode records (Ratnasing-ham and Hebert 2007). Once we confirmed morpholog-ical identification techniques using the resulting geneticsequence data, we paired Lake Sturgeon eggs to thegang, site, date, and weekly average water temperatureto determine depositional trends and timing in relationto known Lake Sturgeon spawning preferences.

Results

The combined sampled strata area of Bird Island Reef,Middle Reef, and the North Gap break wall was318,465.19 m2. We set 67 gangs of egg traps between

May 5 and June 7, 2017 (Figure 1). We set 27 at BirdIsland Reef, 28 at Middle Reef, and 12 near the North Gapbreak wall. In total, we collected 2,728 eggs from furnacefilter materials. We identified 86 eggs as Lake Sturgeoneggs, all originating from 12 gangs collected at the BirdIsland Reef site (Data S1, Supplemental Material; Figure 1).Lake Sturgeon eggs collected at Bird Island Reef on June1 contained emerging Lake Sturgeon larvae after weimmersed them in the ethanol preservative, indicatingthat these eggs had been fertilized and were viable atthe time of capture. We selected a total of 13 putativeLake Sturgeon eggs for genetic species identification,which spanned 12 different egg traps. We obtained COIsequences for all but one sample, which did notsuccessfully amplify (Data S2, Supplemental Material).We recovered sequences at lengths of over 555 bp for 11samples, and 403 bp for one additional sample. Allsequences obtained from putative Lake Sturgeon eggsmatched to Acipenser fulvescens with 100% identity inboth the National Center for Biotechnology Informationand Barcode of Life databases. We found the geneticdistance between Lake Sturgeon and its closest relative,the Shortnose Sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum, to be2.09% at the COI gene region, based on the Barcode ofLife database. Due to the high variability of COI, and thelack of other congeneric species in the area, it is not likelythat the samples were misidentified. Collection trends ofeggs from all species indicate that there were fewer eggsoverall at the North Gap break wall than at either MiddleReef or Bird Island Reef (Table 1). Bird Island Reef had thegreatest number of eggs deposited and was also thelargest area surveyed. Across all sampling sites, weidentified Lake Sturgeon eggs only at the Bird Island Reefsite. Total Lake Sturgeon egg deposition at Bird IslandReef was low, though it varied dramatically by samplingweek. Figure 2 shows two distinct peaks of LakeSturgeon egg frequencies at sampling weeks 3 and 5,which corresponded with water temperatures of 11–148C.

Discussion

Our discovery confirms that Lake Sturgeon arespawning at Bird Island Reef, which has direct implica-tions for informing stock assessment metrics, manage-ment recovery goals, and protection initiatives. Futureassessments of habitat quality and connectivity could

Table 1. Total Lake Sturgeon Acipencer fulvescens egg countsper location sampled (Bird Island Reef, Middle Reef, and theNorth Gap break wall) in the headwaters of the Niagara Riverand proximate Buffalo Harbor from May to June 2017. Thesample size at each location refers to the total number of gangs(i.e., set of three egg traps) deployed and reset at each locationonce a week for 6 wk.

Location

Sample

size

Total

eggs

Lake

Sturgeon eggs

North Gap break wall 12 3 0

Bird Island Reef 27 2,004 86

Middle Reef 28 721 0

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management | www.fwspubs.org June 2018 | Volume 9 | Issue 1 | 269

Lake Sturgeon Spawning Site in the Niagara River R.D. Neuenhoff et al.

also impact habitat remediation planning as well asdredging activities as prescribed in the Remedial ActionPlan for the Niagara River Area of Concern in earlyremediation phases (NYSDEC 2012). This is information isparticularly relevant if there is poor Lake Sturgeon accessto habitat or lack of connectivity following the egg andlarval drift periods. It is uncertain whether Bird IslandReef represents a large contribution to the eastern LakeErie Lake Sturgeon population, but the proximity of reefto the river confluence in an Area of Concern warrantsfurther investigation of this reef and immediate areas toquantify available spawning habitat and address recruit-ment bottlenecks if they exist. Index surveys for LakeSturgeon eggs, larvae, and juveniles along with habitatassessment of possible rearing and nursery areas couldaddress this research need.

Although we observed some eggs at the North Gapbreak wall, the area may be used less for spawning thanthe other two sites. The area near the North Gap breakwall is deeper (mean depth ~ 5 m) relative to the othertwo sites. It lacks the current velocity, spatial heteroge-neity, and dominance of clean coarse gravel substrate of

both Bird Island Reef and Middle Reef; however, thedensity of mature Lake Sturgeon near North Gap makesthe area relevant to spawning activity. While we haveconsistently captured sexually mature adult Lake Stur-geon at this site in the past, we propose that the areamay serve as a staging area prior to spawning,particularly for males actively searching for females(Bruch and Binkowski 2002).

Lake Sturgeon eggs on Bird Island Reef were identifiedwithin the temperature range (9–168C) reported for otherLake Sturgeon populations in the Great Lakes (LaHaye etal. 1992; Bruch and Binkowski 2002; Roseman et al. 2011).Although we did not quantitatively measure currentvelocity, we did observe, based on passive boat drift, thatboth Middle Reef and Bird Island Reef were subject togreater current velocity than the area adjacent to thebreak wall at the North Gap. We acknowledge thatcurrent velocity may differ within the water column, butgiven the proximity of these sites to the river headwa-ters, we were confident that current velocity doesincrease near the river confluence where we found eggs.Previous research from the Des Prairies and L’Assomp-

Figure 2. A summary of the total number of Lake Sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens eggs collected using egg traps over six samplingweeks in May and June of 2017 from Bird Island Reef. The mean temperature in each week is given by the secondary axis. Wecollected no Lake Sturgeon eggs from either the Middle Reef or the North Gap break wall sites.

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management | www.fwspubs.org June 2018 | Volume 9 | Issue 1 | 270

Lake Sturgeon Spawning Site in the Niagara River R.D. Neuenhoff et al.

tion rivers has indicated that Lake Sturgeon prefervelocities between 0.1 and 1.09 m/s for spawning(LaHaye et al. 1992). It is likely that the velocities atMiddle Reef and Bird Island Reef match this criterionbased on our qualitative observations in these areas.Current velocity 1.7 km downstream of Bird Island Reefmeasures between 1.2 and 1.5 m/s with maximum of 3.7m/s (INWC 2014). We also observed small cobble at thesesites, which provides ideal interstitial spaces suitable forLake Sturgeon egg deposition, aeration, and protection(Bruch and Binkowski 2002; Roseman et al. 2011). Wepropose that adult Lake Sturgeon are using Bird IslandReef during the egg deposition period because we foundLake Sturgeon eggs at this site. Our observation of larvalemergence when we submerged the eggs in preserva-tive indicates that these eggs were fertilized and viableat least until the embryonic and larval periods. Futureresearch in this habitat would determine the importanceof Bird Island Reef to spawning and early-life history forthe eastern Lake Erie Lake Sturgeon population(s).

Despite the habitat similarities between Bird IslandReef and Middle Reef, we only collected Lake Sturgeoneggs from Bird Island Reef. This is not to imply that LakeSturgeon may not also use Middle Reef. We visuallyobserved one adult Lake Sturgeon southwest of BirdIsland Reef as the sampling vessel drifted downstreamfollowing egg trap deployment and recoveries atMiddle Reef (though reproductive status of thisindividual was unknown). There could be a number ofreasons that we did not observe eggs on Middle Reef.First, Bird Island Reef is closer to the headwaters of theNiagara River, which is presumably the preferablehabitat. In the Wolf River System, Bruch and Binkowski(2002) noted that females preferred to spawn close tothe shoreline. This observation would be spatiallyconsistent with the geography of Bird Island Reef,which abuts the Black Rock Lock break wall at itseastern extent. By contrast, Middle Reef is somewhatdistant from any shoreline structures, although the reefitself is similarly shallow. Middle Reef and Bird IslandReef may differ slightly in current velocity regime andtherein substrate. Bird Island Reef, being more proxi-mate to the confluence of the Niagara River, encom-passes an area of higher current velocity (as describedabove). These quicker velocities not only provideincrease aeration to eggs, but also provide cleanersubstrates in some cases. This was evident in our eggtrap sample collections. On almost all occasions whenretrieving egg traps from Middle Reef compared to BirdIsland Reef, a small layer of filamentous algae coveredegg trap filter materials from Middle Reef. This differedfrom Bird Island Reef where egg traps were relativelyclean of algae but did contain some Dreissena spp.mussel debris. There may be a higher risk of eggmortality at Middle Reef compared to Bird Island Reef.Caroffino et al. (2010) demonstrated egg loss variabilityamong traps due to fine-scale environmental factorsand predation. If environmental variables or maternalfactors influence egg deposition time, emergence, orloss as observed by Duong et al. (2011) on the upperBlack River, Michigan, the timing of our egg collection

may be mismatched with spawning activity at MiddleReef.

In our study, we limited our observations to theportion of Bird Island Reef flanking the western side ofthe break wall. However, it is worth noting that the BirdIsland Pier divides the reef. The eastern extent of BirdIsland Reef is within the Black Rock Lock canal (refer toFigure 1). Prior to the construction of the pier, Bird IslandReef was several feet above the waterline. Workersremoved much of the stone for the construction of theErie Canal and by 1880 it had become a submerged reef(Wooster and Matthies 2008). Thus, the bathymetry ofBird Island Reef fundamentally changed in the 1800s. It isunclear whether the use of Bird Island Reef by spawningLake Sturgeon has occurred in response to recent habitatdeterioration of other proximate, preferred spawninghabitat or if the area has been historically important tospawning Lake Sturgeon since the late 1800s. Given thelife history and known migration behaviors, it is plausiblethat Lake Sturgeon would be attracted to Bird Island Reefif their natal spawning grounds became inaccessible orunsuitable. Regardless, Bird Island Reef does havesignificance to contemporary Lake Sturgeon reproduc-tion.

Lake Sturgeon populations have demonstrated abruptdeclines and slow recovery rates throughout the GreatLakes basin in the last 200 y (Pollock et al. 2015). Swekaet al. (2018) demonstrated that given the length of timesince the Lake Erie commercial Lake Sturgeon fisherycollapse in the late 1800s, Lake Sturgeon populationsshould have recovered to sustainable abundances (i.e.,biomass at maximum sustainable yield), yet researchershave been unable to quantitatively show these recoverysignals. Significant data deficiencies in the life historyinformation further complicate the situation. The 2012Remedial Action Plan for the Niagara River Area ofConcern identifies several supportive measures toaddress data gaps including the need for ongoingcollection life history information (NYSDEC 2012). Pollocket al. (2015) reviewed data collection needs for LakeSturgeon populations in the Great Lakes basin, and alsohighlighted the importance of filling data gaps in theearly-life stages to inform management restoration plans.The New York State Lake Sturgeon recovery planpresents several monitoring goals related to identifica-tion of spawning areas and the need for robust juvenileassessments (NYSDEC 2017). Our identification of apreviously unknown Lake Sturgeon spawning area fillsa life history data gap that may inform future egg andjuvenile surveys.

The presence of Lake Sturgeon eggs in high-recrea-tional-use areas in a prioritized Area of Concernunderscores the implication for decision makers: howbest to balance user group interests with the conserva-tion of a listed species. Although the shallow bathymetryof Bird Island Reef and Middle Reef may offer somerespite from recreational boat traffic, Lake Sturgeonconservation and recovery initiatives should include aplan for binational costewardship to reduce impacts onLake Sturgeon reproductive potential (e.g., habitat loss,fragmentation, recruitment bottlenecks). Future research

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management | www.fwspubs.org June 2018 | Volume 9 | Issue 1 | 271

Lake Sturgeon Spawning Site in the Niagara River R.D. Neuenhoff et al.

including the design and implementation of robustsurveys to quantify egg deposition, available spawningand rearing habitat, larval drift, and recruitment process-es in the vicinity of Bird Island Reef would directly informfuture recovery planning for eastern Lake Erie LakeSturgeon.

Supplemental Material

Please note: The Journal of Fish and Wildlife Manage-ment is not responsible for the content or functionalityof any supplemental material. Queries should be directedto the corresponding author.

Data S1. Egg mat sampling data showing the numberof Lake Sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens eggs collected ineach gang of egg traps (set of three egg traps) deployedin the headwaters of the Niagara River, New York, during2016.

Found at DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3996/102017-JFWM-087.S1 (14 KB XLSX).

Data S2. Genetic sequence data for eggs collectedfrom egg mat sampling in the headwater area of theNiagara River, New York, during 2016.

Found at DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3996/102017-JFWM-087.S2 (24 KB TXT).

Reference S1. Koelz W. 1925. Fishing industry of theGreat Lakes: appendix XI to the report of the U.S.Commissioner of Fisheries for 1925. Report 1001.Department of Commerce, Washington D.C.

Found at DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3996/102017-JFWM-087.S3 (4040 KB PDF).

Reference S2. Lake Erie LaMP. 2002. The Lake Erielakewide management plan. Vincent J, Letterhos J,editors. Environment Canada, Ontario Region and USEnvironmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, IL.

Found at DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3996/102017-JFWM-087.S4 (8120 KB PDF).

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Dr. Ed Roseman for helpfuldiscussions about Lake Sturgeon spawning habitatpreferences and suggestions about where Lake Sturgeonmay be spawning, as well as Mark Clapsadl and the GreatLakes Science Center providing facility space andequipment and offering many useful suggestions. Wealso would like to thank Mark Yost (U.S. Fish and WildlifeService) for helping to process egg traps during thecourse of this study. We are grateful for the helpfulcomments and suggestions from journal reviewers andthe Associate Editor. This work was funded by the GreatLakes Restoration Initiative.

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is fordescriptive purposes only and does not imply endorse-ment by the U.S. Government.

References

Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. 1990.Basic local alignment search tool. Journal of MolecularBiology 215:403–410.

Auer NA. 1996. Importance of habitat and migration tosturgeons with emphasis on Lake Sturgeon. CanadianJournal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53:152–160.

Bruch RM, Binkowski FP. 2002. Spawning behavior ofLake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens). Journal ofApplied Ichthyology 18:570–579.

Calkin PE, Brett CE. 1978. Ancestral Niagara Riverdrainage: stratigraphic and paleontologic setting.Geological Society of America Bulletin 89:1140–1154.

Caroffino DC, Sutton TM, Elliot RF, Donofrio MC. 2010.Early life stage mortality rates of Lake Sturgeon in thePeshtigo River, Wisconsin. North American Journal ofFisheries Management 30:295–304.

Duong TY, Scribner KT, Crossman JA, Forsythe PS, BakerEA. 2011. Environmental and maternal effects onembryonic and larval developmental time untildispersal of lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens).Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences68:634–654.

Eckes OT, Aloisi DB, Sandheinrich MB. 2015. Egg andlarval development index for Lake Sturgeon. NorthAmerican Journal of Aquaculture 77:211–216.

ESRI. 2015. ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10. ESRI, Redlands,CA.

Golder Associates Ltd. 2011. Recovery strategy for LakeSturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens)—Northwestern Ontar-io, Great Lakes–Upper St. Lawrence River and South-ern Hudson Bay–James Bay populations in Ontario.Ontario Recovery Strategy Series. Prepared for theOntario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough,Ontario. Available: http://files.ontario.ca/environment-and-energy/species-at-risk/stdprod_086034.pdf(March2018).

Hughes TC, Lowie CE, Haynes JM. 2011. Age, growth,relative abundance, and scuba capture of a new orrecovering spawning population of Lake Sturgeon inthe lower Niagara River, New York. North AmericanJournal of Fisheries Management 25:1263–1272.

[IJC] International Joint Commission. 2012. United Statesand Canada Great Lakes Water Quality: agreement,with annexes and texts and terms of reference, signedat Ottawa April 15, 1972; entered into force April 15,1972. Ottawa: Available: https://binational.net//wp-content/uploads/2014/05/1094_Canada-USA-GLWQA-_e.pdf(March 2018).

[INWC] International Niagara Working Committee. 2014.2013-14 Operation of the Lake Erie-Niagara River iceboom. Report to the International Niagara Board ofControl by the International Niagara Working Commit-tee. Available: http://www.ijc.org/files/publications/2013-14-operation-of-lake-erie-niagara-r-ice-boom-oct14.compressed.pdf (February 2018).

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management | www.fwspubs.org June 2018 | Volume 9 | Issue 1 | 272

Lake Sturgeon Spawning Site in the Niagara River R.D. Neuenhoff et al.

Johnson JH, LaPan SR, Klindt RM, Schiavone A. 2006. LakeSturgeon spawning on artificial habitat in the StLawrence River. Journal of Applied Ichthyology22:465–470.

Koelz W. 1925. Fishing industry of the Great Lakes:Appendix XI to the report of the U.S. commissioner offisheries for 1925. Report 1001. Department ofCommerce, Washington D.C. (see Supplemental Mate-rial, Reference S1, http://dx.doi.org/10.3996/102017-JFWM-087.S3).

Koonce JF, Busch WDN, Czapla T. 1996. Restoration ofLake Erie: contribution of water quality and naturalresource management. Canadian Journal of Fisheriesand Aquatic Sciences 53:105–112.

LaHaye M, Branchaud A, Gendron, M, Verdon R, Fortin R.1992. Reproduction, early life history, and character-istics of the spawning grounds of the Lake Sturgeon(Acipenser fulvescens) in Des Prairies and L’Assomptionrivers, near Montreal, Quebec. Canadian Journal ofZoology 70:1681–1689.

[LELSWG] Lake Erie Lake Sturgeon Working Group. 2016.Great Lakes Fishery Commission. Ann Arbor, Michigan.Available: https://www.fws.gov/midwest/sturgeon/documents/2016%20Lake%20Erie%20Lake%20Sturgeon%20Working%20Group%20Report_Final.pdf(March 2018).

Lake Erie LaMP. 2002. The Lake Erie lakewide manage-ment plan. Vincent J, Letterhos J, editors. EnvironmentCanada, Ontario Region and US Environmental Pro-tection Agency, Region, 5. (See Supplemental Material,Reference S2, http://dx.doi.org/10.3996/102017-JFWM-087.S4) Available: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/lake-erie-lamp-2002.pdf (March 2018).

Legard CD. 2015. Lake Sturgeon monitoring in BuffaloHarbor. Section M in NYSDEC 2015, Lake Erie 2014Annual Report. New York State Department ofEnvironmental Conservation, Albany, New York: Avail-able: https://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/fish_marine_pdf/2014lerpt.pdf (March 2018).

McKinley S, Der Kraak GV, Power G. 1998. Seasonalreproductive patterns in the Lake Sturgeon, Acipenserfulvescens, in the vicinity of hydroelectric stations innorthern Ontario. Environmental Biology of Fishes51:245–256.

[NOAA] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra-tion. 2017. Buffalo Harbor chart. NOAA RNC: 14833.Available: http://www.charts.noaa.gov/OnLineViewer/14833.shtml (February 2018).

[NYSDEC] New York State Department of Environ-mental Conservation. 2012. Remedial Action PlanStage 2 Addendum. Restoring Niagara River AOC.Available: http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/water_pdf/nrstage2addfinal.pdf (March 2018).

[NYSDEC] New York State Department of EnvironmentalConservation. 2017. Lake Sturgeon Recovery Plan(Public Comment Draft). 2017. Division of Fish andWildlife Bureau of Fisheries. Available: http://www.dec.

ny.gov/docs/fish_marine_pdf/lakesturgeonrp.pdf(March 2018).

Nichols SJ, Kennedy G, Crawford E, Allen J, French J III,Black G, Blouin M, Hickey J, Chernyak, Haas R, ThomasM. 2003. Assessment of Lake Sturgeon (Acipenserfulvescens) spawning efforts in the lower St. Clair River,Michigan. Journal of Great Lakes Research 29:383–391.

Pikitch EK, Doukakis P, Lauck L, Chakrabarty P, EricksonDL. 2005. Status, trends and management of sturgeonand paddlefish fisheries. Fish and Fisheries 6:233–265.

Pollock NS, Carr M, Kreitals NM, Phillips ID. 2015. Reviewof a species in peril: what we do not know about lakesturgeon may kill them. Environmental Review 23:30–43.

Ratnasingham S, Hebert PD. 2007. BOLD: the barcode oflife data system (http://www.barcodinglife.org). Mo-lecular Ecology Resources 7:355–364.

Rochard E, Castelnaud G, Lepage M. 1990. Sturgeons(Pisces: Acipenseridae); threats and prospects. Journalof Fish Biology 37:123–132.

Root E, Bryce J. 1910. The United States of America; HisMajesty the King of the United Kingdom of GreatBritain and Ireland and of the British Dominionsbeyond the Seas, Emperor of India; ‘‘BoundaryWaters Treaty’’ (1909). Documents on Water Law 6.Available: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer¼https://www.google.com/&httpsredir¼1&article¼1005&context¼lawwater(March 2018).

Roseman EF, Manny B, Boase J, Child M, Kennedy G, CraigJ, Soper K, Drouin R. 2011. Lake Sturgeon response toa spawning reef constructed in the Detroit River.Journal of Applied Ichthyology 27:66–76.

Scott WB, Crossman EJ. 1973. Freshwater fishes ofCanada. Bulletin of Fisheries Research Board Canada184:1–996.

Shokralla S, Hellberg RS, Handy SM, King I, Hajibabaei M.2015. A DNA mini-barcoding system for authentica-tion of processed fish products. Scientific Reports5:15894. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/srep15894 (February 2018).

Sweka JA, Neuenhoff R, Withers J, Davis L. 2018.Application of a depletion-based stock reductionanalysis (DB-SRA) to Lake Sturgeon in Lake Erie.Journal of Great Lakes Research doi: 10.1016/j.jglr.2018.01.002

[US EPA] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2012.Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement Available:https://www.epa.gov/glwqa (February 2018).

Wang YL, Binkowski FP, Doroshov SI, 1985. Effect oftemperature on early development of White and LakeSturgeon, Acipenser transmontanus and A. fulvescens.Environmental Biology of Fishes 14:43–50.

Wooster M, Matthies L. 2008. Buffalo and Niagara rivershabitat assessment and conservation framework.Report to Buffalo Niagara River Keepers. Buffalo, NY.Available: http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/regions_pdf/bnrhabreport.pdf (February 2018).

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management | www.fwspubs.org June 2018 | Volume 9 | Issue 1 | 273

Lake Sturgeon Spawning Site in the Niagara River R.D. Neuenhoff et al.