Welcome to the interactive web schedule for the 2018 Midwest Fish & Wildlife Conference! For tips on how to navigate this site, visit the "Helpful Info" section. To return to the main Conference website, go to: www.midwestfw.org.
S10: Collaborating for Fisheries Management: Opportunities and Challenges from Interactions of Local Lake Organizations with State Agencies [clear filter]
AUTHORS. Chris Solomon, Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies; Marco Janssen, Arizona State University; Sunny Jardine, University of Washington; Olaf Jensen, Rutgers University; Stuart Jones, University of Notre Dame; Brett van Poorten, British Columbia Ministry of the Environment
ABSTRACT. Local organizations, such as lake associations, take an active role in fisheries management in some jurisdictions. This local involvement in may complement or complicate management efforts by state agencies. We briefly review the role that local organizations play in the management of fisheries landscapes, and draw from the fisheries, economic, and social-ecological literatures to suggest pathways and obstacles for successful collaborative management of these systems. Our goal is to set the stage for the symposium to follow.
AUTHORS. Eric Olson, University of Wisconsin - Extension Lakes
ABSTRACT. Continued enjoyment of our lakes depends on proactive management that reduces polluted runoff, restores and protects shorelines, contains and prevents the spread of aquatic invasive plants, and builds resiliency into lakes-based social and ecological systems. Faced with the challenge of meeting this need across 3,600 lakes larger than 20 acres in size, the State of Wisconsin has for forty years embraced a collaborative approach that brings together local organizations,, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and the University of Wisconsin to jointly develop and implement lake management plans. The network of hundreds of local lake organizations are central to the Partnership’s work, but natural resource managers need to better understand the origin and function of local groups to better engage them in fisheries, habitat, AIS, and other issues. This presentation will recap the history and development of the Wisconsin Lakes Partnership and discuss key legal and policy components that have arisen in the last 40 years. We will explore the variations in capacity and engagement across hundreds of lake organizations and share recommendations for successfully partnering with lake organizations to carry out fisheries-related work on inland lakes.
AUTHORS. Michelle Marko, Concordia College; Mona Ibrahim, Concordia College; Jeff Forester, MN Lakes and Rivers Advocates; Benjamin Bjertness, Concordia College; Matthew Zabel, Concordia College
ABSTRACT. In the land of 10,000 lakes, “lake culture” is an essential part of the fabric of life for many Minnesotans. Many Minnesotans work to protect their lake through lake associations. However, as small non-profit organizations their concerns are often overlooked by law-makers. In 2017, we attended the annual meetings of seven lake associations, piloted a preliminary survey to 60 lake associations, and surveyed the executive committee of 407 different lake associations across Minnesota to determine their demographics, projects, involvement in the community, and primary concerns. Respondents reported that all lake associations were created to protect and preserve their lake. Lake associations across Minnesota typically had between 100 to 400 members with membership open to anyone interested in the lake, though more than 95% of members were either year-round or seasonal residents. The most common goals of lake associations were to control aquatic invasive species (AIS), improve lake water quality and improve fisheries. Panfish, bass, northern pike and walleye were most commonly fished across the state. More than 1/3 of lake associations have committees dedicated to fish management and about 6% of their budget is spent directly on fish stocking. Declining fisheries or fishing pressure was not one of the primary concerns; rather lake association members were most concerned about aquatic invasive species (AIS), overall water quality and runoff. Lake association members expressed specific concerns that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Section did not listen to lake association member concerns; particularly in relation to AIS. When taken cumulatively, lake association members donate about $6.25 million annually to protect their lake and contribute about 1.2 million volunteer hours to lake conservation activities. Lake management would benefit by tapping into this force and working collaboratively to help manage this resource.
AUTHORS. Matthew Mitro, Wisconsin DNR Fisheries Research; Jeff Hastings, Trout Unlimited Driftless Area Restoration Effort; Kent Johnson, Trout Unlimited Kiap-TU-Wish Chapter; Heidi Keuler, Fishers & Farmers Partnership Coordinator, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service; John Lyons, University of Wisconsin-Madison; Nancy North, Watershed Leaders Network Lead & Principal, NewGround, Inc.; Rod Ofte, Wallace Center Pasture Project; Kirk Olson, Wisconsin DNR Fisheries Management; Jana Stewart, U.S. Geological Survey; Jordan Weeks, Wisconsin DNR Fisheries Management
ABSTRACT. An individual trout stream typically does not have a strict analog to a local lake organization that can work with state agencies to improve fisheries management of the stream. However, habitat and fisheries in trout streams at regional scales collectively benefit from collaboration among angling and conservation organizations, farmer-led watershed groups, and state and federal agencies. Here we present a review of such collaborative partnerships that work to protect and improve trout fisheries in Wisconsin streams. We find that these partnerships work by engaging anglers in trout conservation and citizen science; building trust among anglers, farmers and natural resource professionals; and exchanging expertise among all players. We present three examples of how collaborative efforts have benefitted fisheries, stream and watershed management: (1) Trout Unlimited and the TU Driftless Area Restoration Effort have used Wisconsin DNR and USGS models of stream temperature and fish distribution to engage stream restoration as a climate change adaptation strategy. A critical contribution has been the implementation of citizen-based monitoring of stream temperature and habitat response to restoration. (2) Rotational grazing in the Driftless Area has improved soil and water conservation, allowing farmers and fish to thrive in this region together. Grazing also provides needed maintenance to state-owned riparian areas to improve angler access while conserving habitat and supporting farmers. (3) Fishers & Farmers Fish Habitat Partnership brings together the agricultural community, anglers and resource agencies to build trust in working towards common conservation goals in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. Fishers & Farmers has also supported a Watershed Leaders Network to build local efforts to improve land use at the watershed scale. We illustrate these three collaborative efforts with examples from Wisconsin trout streams and watersheds to show the benefits to trout stream management and the challenges to expanding these efforts.
AUTHORS. Jeff Forester, Minnesota Lakes and Rivers Advocates
ABSTRACT. After almost a decade spent working on water issues in Minnesota, we believe that one of the significant barriers to success is a systems failure within our organizations and institutions and their ability to communicate and coordinate efforts across a diverse base of stakeholders.We are currently piloting a new approach to organizing people, institutions and organizations and the framework in which they meet to work together to get work done. The approach we is called “Civic Governance.” For the last few years both the Citizen’s League and Minnesota Lakes and Rivers Advocates have been working to reorganize their existing resources; time, knowledge and money within our organizations and testing this new approach. We believe it will have a significant impact in Minnesota’s water quality efforts, particularly with regard to Aquatic Invasive Species, fisheries management and shoreline protection/restoration.Davenport and Seekamp (2013) highlight important differences between community capital and community capacity: “While community capital encompasses a variety of foundational resources or assets (e.g., physical, financial, technological) upon which a community can draw in times of need, community capacity is the interaction, mobilization and activation of these assets toward social or institutional change. Stated differently, a community may possess a broad range of capitals needed to cope with problems…but lack the capacity to establish common goals, make decisions based on mutual learning, and act collectively.” Additionally, recent research points to the important role of legitimacy and fairness as an interlinking and overarching concept in sustainable watershed management.Traditional Civic Engagement efforts around water quality have had some positive impact, but our experience with local groups indicate both a need and a desire for a framework that creates the space for citizens not to just engage on an issue, but to come together and govern for the common good - Civic Governance.
AUTHORS. Scott Toshner, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
ABSTRACT. In 2009, the modern incarnation of large woody habitat restoration (aka. fish sticks) began in Wisconsin . Since then thousands of trees have been added to littoral zones on hundreds of lake riparian properties. This presentation will relate lessons learned in working with riparian landowners who are willing to implement fish sticks projects. From initial meetings with fisheries management, lake groups and individual property owner site evaluations to a citizen driven model of fish sticks project implementation which envisions increased habitat restoration using the Wisconsin Healthy Lakes program as the main vehicle.
Tuesday January 30, 2018 9:40am - 10:00am CST
103A
AUTHORS. Carl Pedersen, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
ABSTRACT. Collaborative programs that engage civic groups, school groups, lake associations and individual volunteers are a valuable part of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Walker Area Fisheries Office work plan. Including non-governmental participation in the day to day Walker office operation not only allows area staff the ability to collect additional data but also builds strong bonds with community members and interested parties. These bonds prove invaluable when conflicts arise. Having already established a relationship and having community members take an active role in fisheries management develops a level of trust in the staff and the data collected. Through input group processes with associations from Walker Area lakes many lessons have been learned that make the process run more smoothly. Examples (or case histories) will be provided.
Tuesday January 30, 2018 10:20am - 10:40am CST
103A
AUTHORS. Jessie Koehle, Eric Macbeth - City of Eagan; Tim Ohmann, Jim Levitt, T.J. DeBates - Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
ABSTRACT. One of the City of Eagan’s Water Resources program goals is for 12 of the City’s lakes to support public fishing opportunities, giving most residents a place to fish about a mile from home. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has routinely conducted fish assessments on only about five of these lakes, therefore the City has developed the capacity to assess each of the remaining seven lakes once every five years. In the resulting collaboration, the City shares findings, analysis, and management decisions with DNR, benefitting from their expertise and sharing resources when possible. The partnership promotes communication and support between the two government entities in other lake management areas as well, such as plant management and winter lake aeration. This presentation will give details about Eagan’s fisheries population sampling methods, management history, and program goals.
Tuesday January 30, 2018 10:40am - 11:00am CST
103A
AUTHORS. Christopher S. Jones, University of Iowa; Keith E. Schilling, Iowa Geological Survey
ABSTRACT. In recognition of the important eco¬system services that they provide, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), along with several agency and NGO partners, has been restoring oxbows in Iowa since 2002. These projects serve as both innovative fish habitat improvement and nutrient trapping practices. Project partners have worked with farmers and landowners through voluntary con¬servation programs to restore these floodplain features mostly in Central and Northwest Iowa, but also most recently in Eastern Iowa in the Middle Cedar River basin. The practice is intriguing to some landowners since water quality and wildlife responses have been notable and potential sites are typically found on marginal land unsuit¬able for production. Previous research has quantified both the nutrient reduction and wildlife benefits. Examined here is how oxbow restoration fits within the current corn-soybean production system, and what agencies and conservationists can do to optimize habitat and water quality benefits while at the same time increasing the likelihood of farmer adoption. Important considerations include cost, the Endangered Species Act, modification of tile drainage outlets, angling and hunting, wildlife watching, livestock watering, and irrigation. We will also quantify the potential of the practice as a landscape scale solution for meeting Iowa and Gulf of Mexico nitrate reduction goals of 45%, and the practice’s potential in other areas of Iowa.
Tuesday January 30, 2018 11:00am - 11:20am CST
103A
ABSTRACT. The St. Marys River is a unique water body connecting Lake Superior and Lake Huron with a binational channel. In 1987, the river was designated as an Area of Concern (AOC) due to pollution and habitat alteration. The river is listed for multiple Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) under the AOC program including two related to Fish and Wildlife Populations and Habitat.In 1992, the Soo Area Sportsmen’s Club initiated planning to restore the Little Rapids section of the St. Marys River and remove the habitat related BUIs. Additional local partners involved in this process included a second sportsmen's club, the Chippewa County Road Commission, and the Eastern Upper Peninsula Regional Planning and Developement Commission. After 25 years of locally driven, and occasionally contentious, project planning the Little Rapids Restoration Project was completed and resulted in the following:Removal of a causeway that blocked natural water flow.Construction of a bridge that restored free flow of water to historic rapids.Improved aquatic connection and fish passage in the Little Rapids area.Better fishing, recreation, and tourism opportunities for the community.Action toward the removal of the Area of Concern designation.Approximately 70 acres of aquatic habitat were restored while providing safe pedestrian access for fishing and replacing a critical piece of infrastructure for residents. The project has restored foraging, spawning, and nursery habitat for a wide variety of sport fish (including lake sturgeon, whitefish, and salmon) as well as other aquatic organisms needed for a healthy river system. Continued local monitoring and stewardship of the restored rapids will ensure that they can be enjoyed by generations to come. This habitat and infrastructure project was funded by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative through the NOAA-Great Lakes Commission Areas of Concern Regional Partnership.
Tuesday January 30, 2018 11:20am - 11:40am CST
103A