Welcome to the interactive web schedule for the 2019 Midwest Fish & Wildlife Conference! Please note, this event has passed. To return to the main Conference website, go to: www.midwestfw.org.

For tips on navigating this schedule, click HELPFUL INFO below.

CONFERENCE SCHEDULE UPDATES & CHANGES: As a result of the prolonged government shutdown, we experienced a number of cancellations and changes to the schedule. Cancellations and changes are listed here (as of January 26, 2019). 

Sign up or log in to bookmark your favorites and sync them to your phone or calendar.

S01: Using Standardized Assessments to Evaluate Harvest Regulations: Advancing Science-Based Fisheries Management [clear filter]
Monday, January 28

10:20am EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) The North American AFS Freshwater Fish Sampling Standardization Program: Update and Evaluating Harvest Regulations
AUTHORS: Scott A. Bonar, U.S. Geological Survey Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit; Norman Mercado-Silva, Centro de Investigacion en Biodiversidad y Conservacion, Universidad Autonoma del Estado de Morelos; Kevin L. Pope, U.S. Geological Survey Nebraska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit

ABSTRACT: Evaluation of harvest regulations clearly benefits from standard collection and presentation of data. Advantages include the ability to better evaluate regulations over space and time; the ability to share data more effectively with colleagues across political boundaries; the capacity to design large studies; and improved communication with anglers. The American Fisheries Society developed standard methods to sample freshwater fish populations to aid in data comparison and collection, publishing them in 2009 in the book Standard Methods for Sampling North American Freshwater Fishes. This project involved 284 scientists from 107 different organizations across Canada, Mexico and the United States. Because of interest generated from the first edition, the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA) and AFS are supporting development of a second edition of the book to move AFS closer towards having development of standard sampling methods as an ongoing activity of the society. Goals for the second edition include querying fish management agencies across North America as to areas of improvement, but otherwise retaining methods as similar as possible to preserve standardization; adding additional requested chapters and expanding participants; revising data averages and developing a process for updating methods in the future. Standardization in industry, medicine and science has led to great advances. American Fisheries Society standard freshwater fish sampling methods are a powerful tool for addressing a wide variety of changing objectives. One of these is evaluating harvest management regulations, where improved assessments are possible with larger samples sizes, the ability to design before-after-treatment-control experiments and collaborate across political boundaries when managing the continent's fish populations.

Monday January 28, 2019 10:20am - 10:40am EST

10:40am EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Harvest Regulations: What Do We Know, What Do We Need to Know, What Should We Do Next to Develop and Implement Standardized Assessments to Evaluate Harvest Regulations?
AUTHORS: Quinton Phelps, West Virginia University; Martha Mather, Kansas State University; Daniel Shoup, Oklahoma State University

ABSTRACT: Fisheries managers are tasked with maintaining specific target sportfish populations to provide satisfactory opportunities for anglers. The outcome of this complex management process is variable and depends on characteristics of the ecosystem and population. Of the limited options that are available to alter populations and ultimately influence angler satisfaction, harvest regulations (size or creel limits) are arguably the most common tool. However, when and where harvest regulations work is poorly understood, and at times regulations do not have the effect that is expected. In this talk, we review what we know and do not know about regulation effectiveness and matches and mismatches between regulations and population characteristics. To develop a framework that can be used to decide when a regulation change would be beneficial, we identify criteria on which to base standardized assessments to evaluate harvest regulations. As examples of criteria to consider, prior to implementing a regulation change, standardized fish population assessment data should be used to model the effects of possible regulation changes. Additional, standardized sampling after implementing a regulation change should be used to determine if the desired effect on the population was achieved. In situations where the desired effect is not observed, a secondary series of diagnostics can be implemented to identify the influence of other biotic and abiotic drivers. Even if regulations provide the desired effects, follow-up data to guide our understanding of fish populations and further our understanding of the conditions governing regulation effectiveness is essential. Thus, standardized evaluations of these harvest regulations can yield the same benefits as standardized population assessments and can provide a pathway to learn more about the ecosystem.

Monday January 28, 2019 10:40am - 11:00am EST

11:00am EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Using “Standard” vs. “Standardized” Sampling Methods to Evaluate Sport Fish Regulations
AUTHORS: Jeremy J. Pritt, Joseph D. Conroy – Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife

ABSTRACT: In 2009, the American Fisheries Society (AFS) published a recommended set of Standard Methods, which sought to provide comparable fisheries data across North America. Since then, many agencies and researchers have adopted these standard methods. However, to evaluate regulations agencies often use long-term data produced by “standardized” methods—consistently used, long-term approaches that may have been shared among multiple agencies but that also differ from the North American Standard Methods (NASM). Significant barriers may exist for fisheries managers and researchers who consider transitioning from “standardized” methods to the NASM. Here, we illustrate important differences between “standard” and “standardized” methods in the context of evaluating sport fish regulations. To make informed decisions regarding regulation effectiveness, fisheries managers require population-specific data such as abundance, age and size structures, growth, and mortality measured before the regulation was implemented and for some period after. In some cases, the NASM may fail to provide these crucial data. To illustrate, we contrast two case studies: (1) using the NASM to evaluate reservoir crappie harvest regulations; as compared to, (2) retaining a multi-agency, non-NASM, but “standardized” method to assess the efficacy of Ohio River Sauger regulations. We conclude by recommending the following for future standard method development work: (1) explicitly consider and detail the sport fish population data needs of fisheries managers; (2) develop a mechanism to formally capture emerging assessment techniques as standard methods; and, (3) create a structure, through AFS, tasked with identifying, evaluating, and communicating accepted standard methods and their use.

Monday January 28, 2019 11:00am - 11:20am EST

11:20am EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Standardized and Robust Analyses for Evaluating Fishing Regulation Effectiveness
AUTHORS: Dray D. Carl, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; Daniel E. Shoup, Oklahoma State University; Martha E. Mather, Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit; Quinton E. Phelps, West Virginia University

ABSTRACT: Regulation changes are frequently used to alter lakes and reservoir fisheries to achieve management goals.  Although regulations are generally thought to be effective, fisheries management is hampered by a lack of published studies evaluating regulation effectiveness.  This is particularly troublesome given examples where regulations did not have their expected result, as the lack of published literature on this topic means there is little guidance as to when regulations will be effective.  Further, the few studies that address the topic typically just compare samples from before and after regulations are applied.  In this traditional before-after approach, many temporal changes (e.g., drought, flood, mean annual temperature, etc.) could drive changes in the fish population over time that would erroneously be attributed to the regulation change.  Use of the BACI (before, after, control, impact) design is a more robust approach that avoids erroneous decisions that might result from traditional before-after analyses.  However, the BACI design is little used, probably because of the perception that it would require more effort than is available to sample additional control lakes.  However, we suggest that some prior planning and creativity can make BACI designs possible with little additional work, especially in situations where standardized sampling is routinely used to monitor other lakes that could serve as control systems.  It is even possible that multi-state projects could be performed using routine monitoring that is already planned to provide control lakes or additional replication in cases where both states use the same standard sampling protocol.  State agencies considering regulation changes have a unique opportunity to significantly improve our understanding of regulation effectiveness if they planned BACI studies to track effects of new regulations through time, benefiting the entire field with information that up to this point has been sorely lacking.

Monday January 28, 2019 11:20am - 11:40am EST

11:40am EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Wisconsin's Northern Highland Fishery Research Area: A Long-term Comprehensive Program for Evaluating Fisheries Regulations
AUTHORS: Stephanie L. Shaw, Greg G. Sass – Wisconsin Department Natural Resources, Office of Applied Science, Escanaba Lake Research Station

ABSTRACT: The Northern Highland Fishery Research Area (NHFRA) includes five lakes in north central Wisconsin that were designated for experimental fisheries research purposes in the 1940s by the Wisconsin Conservation Commission. The five lakes were selected to encompass the diversity of lake types and fish communities present in Wisconsin. The NHFRA has maintained the longest running compulsory creel census in the world (1946-present), has monitored fish community, aquatic ecosystem, and climatic variables through standardized surveys, and has conducted directed research to evaluate unrestricted fisheries (no closed season, bag limits, or length limits), harvest regulations, gear restrictions, and the influences of stocking over time. Key species evaluated in the context of fisheries regulations or stocking have included walleye Sander vitreus, smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomeiu, northern pike Esox lucius, muskellunge Esox masquinongy, and lake trout Salvelinus namaycush. The creel census and standardized fish surveys have afforded valuable information to WDNR biologists regarding angler and fish responses (single-species and fish community) to a given regulation change. We will summarize the history of the Northern Highland Fishery Research Area and discuss several case studies of walleye, muskellunge, and smallmouth bass responses to harvest regulations or the lack thereof that have been directly applied to fisheries management in Wisconsin. By combining long-term creel survey information with standardized fish population surveys, Wisconsin has been able to make sound, science-based decisions to manage its diversity of fishery opportunities and has also been able to rapidly respond to emerging fisheries issues.

Monday January 28, 2019 11:40am - 12:00pm EST

1:20pm EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Data-Driven Harvest Regulations in Minnesota: Approaches, Priorities, and Northern Pike
AUTHORS: Shannon J. Fisher, Allen G. Stevens, Bethany J. Bethke – Minnesota Department of Natural Resources

ABSTRACT: The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MNDNR) maintains fisheries management plans on more than 4,400 lakes.  To keep plans current, inform harvest regulation development, and keep pace with changing lake conditions, >650 lake surveys are completed annually.  Minnesota’s lake survey program began over 70 years ago, with the modern program established in 1993.  Survey data have informed management decisions locally and statewide.  The evolution of Northern Pike management is a key example of how Minnesota has utilized this valuable database.  During the 1980s, increasing numbers of anglers and fisheries managers became concerned about long-term declines in Northern Pike sizes.  As a result, MNDNR experimented with length-based regulations.  Using pre- and post-regulation lake survey data (1970s-early 2000s) evidence was found that length limits could improve size structure – but not uniformly across lakes.  Therefore, a limited suite of “Toolbox” regulations for lake-specific management was developed.  Pre- and post-Toolbox regulation survey data were used to perform a meta-analysis (>50 lakes) that indicated >10 years of post-data were needed to detect size structure improvements across a range of lakes.  In 2016, we strategized to improve Northern Pike management across Minnesota and three starkly different sets of spatially clustered objectives emerged.  In 2018, lakes meeting regulatory and biological criteria were divided into three zones with different length and bag limits.  Our standardized lake survey program was integral in identifying lakes included in the evaluation and will provide the necessary post-regulation data.  Given valuable lessons learned in early analyses, we know that it will take time to detect results.  Similar evaluations have proven extremely useful in the development of regulations to better manage other recreationally important species in Minnesota, including Walleye Sanders vitreus, Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides, and Muskellunge Esox masquinongy. 

Monday January 28, 2019 1:20pm - 1:40pm EST

1:40pm EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) First Year Evaluation of a Regulation Change for Walleye at Cedar Bluff Reservoir, Kansas
AUTHORS: Susan Steffen, Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism

ABSTRACT: A 21-inch minimum length limit (MLL) on Walleye at Cedar Bluff Reservoir, Kansas, was implemented in 2018 to prevent recruitment overfishing by reducing exploitation of spawning-sized Walleye. Initially, anglers opposed the 21-inch MLL and voiced this through various outlets: on the 2013 Kansas Licensed Angler Survey, at commission meetings in 2017, and during the public meeting about the MLL in July of 2017. To better understand anglers’ feelings toward the MLL, I added supplemental questions at the end of the access point creel survey that was conducted from March to October 2018. Anglers that agreed to answer the additional questions were asked about the number of days they fished at Cedar Bluff Reservoir last year, their level of support for the 21-inch MLL on Walleye, and their confidence in KDWPT. Confidence in KDWPT was measured by four questions in a Likert scale format based on responses from 1 to 5 where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree. I was able to obtain useable responses from 200 anglers from March through early September 2018. The average age of anglers was 47 years old (SD = 16.13) and they fished on average 22 days (SD = 26.29) last year at Cedar Bluff Reservoir. The plurality, or 34%, of anglers interviewed supported the 21-inch MLL on Walleye. Confidence in KDWPT was high, with Likert scale means ranging from 3.95 to 4.10. Results from the remainder of anglers interviewed in September and October of 2018 will be presented as well. The creel survey and supplemental interview questions will continue through 2020 to determine if angler support for the Walleye regulation changes as the Walleye population responds to the regulation as well.

Monday January 28, 2019 1:40pm - 2:00pm EST

2:00pm EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Using Standardized Assessments to Evaluate Harvest Regulations in Illinois: Let's Start the Discussion
AUTHORS: Michael J. Mounce, Division of Fisheries, Illinois Department of Natural Resources

ABSTRACT: The Division of Fisheries in the Illinois Department of Natural Resources lists specific protocol in our Manual of Operations for standardized sampling methods for the evaluation of both fish populations and the success of stocked fish. We do not have standardized methods specified for evaluating harvest regulations. Our biologists realize that this would be a valuable tool. The Division of Fisheries does have a standard form for submitting harvest regulations requests/suggestions for review by piers, mid-level managers, and finally approval by the Chief of Fisheries. This form does not include any request or requirements for evaluating the suggested regulation. The AFS book, "Standard Methods for Sampling North American Freshwater Fishes" suggested sampling methods for specific species would be a great foundation if these methods can be employed prior to implementing the harvest regulation. Effectively and adequately collecting data about the "three" rate functions, recruitment, growth, and mortality, is critical. The estimation of angler mortality is a critical component of any harvest regulation proposal. Angler harvest/creel surveys should be the foundation of any harvest regulation proposal and evaluation, as the success of any regulation will only be realized where angling mortality is a/the critical factor in limiting the quality or viability of a fishery. Many state agencies, including the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, are facing staffing and funding shortages for a wide variety of reasons and this affects their ability to critically evaluate the effectiveness of harvest regulations, or propose and implement new sampling protocol. However, the development of methods and tools (supporting software) to appropriately propose and evaluate harvest regulations would be highly valuable asset to fisheries managers, the resources they manage, the agencies and constituents they work for, and ultimately the communities that benefit economically from fisheries with greater stability and improved quality.

Monday January 28, 2019 2:00pm - 2:20pm EST

2:20pm EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Maintaining Quality Fisheries in Small Public Lakes Using Restrictive Harvest Regulations
AUTHORS: Bryan Kinter, Mike Wilkerson – Ohio Division of Wildlife

ABSTRACT: Overharvest is a common result of opening small lakes and reservoirs to unregulated public fishing. In lakes comprised primarily of largemouth bass and sunfish (Lepomis spp.), populations dominated by large, older sunfish and abundant largemouth bass quickly become dominated by abundant, small sunfish and few largemouth bass. This can occur after only one year of public fishing and results in a decline in angler use and satisfaction. Maintaining quality fisheries in small lakes requires restrictive harvest regulations of both sunfish and largemouth bass, and frequent evaluation of these regulations is required. Using a combination of trapnet and electrofishing surveys, harvest quotas, length limits, and bag limits, the ODNR-Division of Wildlife successfully maintained quality sunfish/largemouth bass fisheries on the Lake La Su An Wildlife Area from 1983-2011, after these lightly-fished, privately owned lakes were opened to public fishing. Each spring, trapnet and electrofishing surveys were conducted to evaluate bluegill and largemouth bass abundance and size structure. Bluegill harvest quotas were generated based on these estimates while restrictive length limits (minimum or slot) were set for largemouth bass. A complete creel census monitored harvest. From 1987-2011, an average of 40.8% of bluegill over 150mm were also over 200mm, and largemouth bass electrofishing CPE averaged 371 fish/hour. Over 45% of bluegill harvested were greater than 200 mm in total length. The Lake La Su An fishery demonstrates that restrictive harvest regulations can be used to maintain quality fisheries in small lakes open to public fishing. However, extensive agency resources are required to collect the data needed to manage these types of fisheries.

Monday January 28, 2019 2:20pm - 2:40pm EST

2:40pm EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Evaluating a Statewide Yellow Perch Regulation for Michigan
AUTHORS: David Clapp, MDNR, Charlevoix; Andrew Briggs, MDNR, Lake St. Clair; Randall Claramunt, MDNR, Lake Huron; David Fielder, MDNR, Alpena; Troy Zorn, MDNR, Marquette

ABSTRACT: Michigan DNR recently evaluated a revised statewide bag limit for yellow perch using creel survey data, fisheries independent assessments,  and social survey data. We will present an overview of this evaluation, highlighting the advantages and limitations of each of these data sources. This review resulted in a recommendation for regulation change in Michigan, but also resulted in development of a template that can be used in future regulation evaluations for species other than yellow perch. 

Monday January 28, 2019 2:40pm - 3:00pm EST

3:20pm EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Criteria for Removing a Protected Slot Limit on Smallmouth Bass Using Standardized Fisheries Survey Data
AUTHORS: Mark J. Fincel, South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks

ABSTRACT: In an effort to improve size structure of Smallmouth Bass Micropterus dolomieu in Lake Sharpe, a large Missouri River impoundment, the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks instituted two protected slot limits: restricted (305-457 mm) beginning in 2003 and relaxed (355-457 mm) beginning in 2008. We examined the effects of these regulations on Smallmouth Bass harvest and population characteristics and compared creel and population trends of Lake Sharpe Smallmouth Bass to adjacent reservoirs where Smallmouth Bass harvest was not regulated. Prior to the slot limit, the majority of the Smallmouth Bass harvest on Lake Sharpe was from 250-400 mm (PP355 mm, and angler catch of trophy Smallmouth Bass was observed, suggesting an effective regulation. However, a before-after-control-impact (BACI) study design and analysis indicated the slot limit regulation was not likely contributing to the observed increases in Smallmouth Bass size structure. Indeed, similar changes in size structure were observed in abutting Lakes Oahe and Francis Case, suggesting a Missouri River system-wide affect was responsible for observed population changes. Subsequently, the protective slot limit regulation was removed from Lake Sharpe in 2012.

Monday January 28, 2019 3:20pm - 3:40pm EST

3:40pm EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Opening Lake Erie's Spring Bass Season: Standard Assessments Inform Increased Opportunities for Anglers
AUTHORS: Zak J. Slagle, Travis Hartman – Ohio Division of Wildlife

ABSTRACT: Ohio anglers have historically fished heavily for black bass, leading to record levels of angler effort and harvest in the late 1990’s. Additionally, missing year classes of bass, invasion of non-native nest predators (Round Goby), and resurgence in possible avian predators (Double-crested Cormorant) were all seen as threats to the bass population through the early 2000’s. Ohio Division of Wildlife also lacked yearly surveys of black basses, complicating fishery management decisions. ODW responded by increasing restrictions on bag limits and minimum sizes for black bass harvest; the 14 inch, 5 fish bag limit that currently stands was created in 2000. A seasonal catch-and-release only regulation was added in 2004 to further reduce harvest after the 2000 regulations failed to sufficiently improve size structure. Since then, the increase of catch-and-release ethics have dramatically reduced harvest during the open season, and ODW has added yearly surveys that allow fisheries managers to better evaluate population trends. Ohio’s Lake Erie black bass populations are unlikely to be negatively impacted by newly introduced relaxed regulations (i.e., changing the seasonal closure to a one fish possession, 18 inch minimum size limit). Black bass harvest during the spawning season is unlikely to increase substantially with these regulation changes. However, current levels of bass fishing effort are near historical lows, and liberalization of regulations will allow additional fishing opportunities. The new regulations should expand angler opportunities and allow anglers to keep and weigh in a potential state record fish while conserving the bass population for generations to come.

Monday January 28, 2019 3:40pm - 4:00pm EST

4:00pm EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Use of Multiple Surveys and Stock Assessment Models to Evaluate Effects of Liberalized Walleye Harvest Regulations in Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron and Gauge Progress on Management Objectives
AUTHORS: David G. Fielder, Michigan Department of Natural Resources

ABSTRACT: Walleye reached recovery targets in Saginaw Bay in 2009 and a management simulation model indicated that recreational fishing mortality could be increased by as much as 50% without exceeding reference points of sustainability. Recreational harvest regulations (daily possession limit and minimum length limits) were liberalized in 2015. Monitoring and evaluation has taken the form of creel survey and a fishery independent fish community netting survey. Besides indicators from those efforts, a stock assessment model is also used to gauge mortality rates and status relevant to sustainability thresholds. While walleye harvest has increased some, recreational effort has not changed greatly and that appears to limit the magnitude of the effect. The multiple survey and modeling approach to harvest regulation monitoring is effective, but costly and requires ongoing commitment to survey work and model updating.

Monday January 28, 2019 4:00pm - 4:20pm EST

4:20pm EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) Crappies in Ohio: Building a General Approach to Determining Regulation Success Based on Standard Fish Population Assessments and Angler Feedback
AUTHORS: Joseph D. Conroy, Jeremy J. Pritt, Kevin S. Page, Stephen M. Tyszko, Richard D. Zweifel – Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife

ABSTRACT: Crappie harvest regulations seek to increase yield by allowing additional growth before anglers remove fish from the population.  Density-dependent slow growth, stunting, potential for overharvest, angler preferences for larger crappies, and angler preferences for regulations all present challenges to successfully managing crappie fisheries by using harvest regulations.  In Ohio, minimum length limits for harvest and daily bag limits have been used to regulate crappie populations since the early 1990s, with regulations enacted at more than 40 reservoirs by 2010.  The success of these regulations was assessed by examining changes in abundance (CPUE of age-2 crappies and older), growth (mean length at age 2), and size structure (PSD of harvestable-sized fish) from standard assessments conducted during the period 2003–2017.  Further, we determined angler satisfaction with the numbers and sizes of crappies caught post-regulation along with their support for the regulation from interviews during creel surveys and from postcard surveys during 2017.  Using linear mixed models, we found that in general the regulation led to increased crappie abundance, slowed growth, and changed size structure; the regulation benefited crappie populations more in larger (> 1,000 ha) and more productive (total phosphorus concentrations > 75 micrograms/L) reservoirs.  Angler satisfaction (percent satisfied) with the numbers of crappies caught ranged 30–68% and with the sizes of crappies caught ranged 24–72%, yet there was clear support for both the minimum length limit (percent support ranged 64–92%) and the daily bag limit (66–93%) with little opposition (percent opposition was < 11%) to the regulation.  These analyses ultimately led to removing the minimum length limit and daily bag regulation at 13 reservoirs.  More importantly, however, a general approach to regulation evaluation was developed, which includes analysis of standardized data on both fish populations and their anglers.

Monday January 28, 2019 4:20pm - 4:40pm EST

4:40pm EST

(SYMPOSIA-01) A Portfolio Approach to Integrated Assessment and Research Can Provide a Larger Context for the Successful Evaluation of Fisheries Harvest Regulations
AUTHORS: Martha E. Mather, U. S. Geological Survey, Kansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Division of Biology, Kansas State University; John M. Dettmers, Great Lakes Fishery Commission; Roy A. Stein, Aquatic Ecology Laboratory, The Ohio State University; Donna L. Parrish, U.S. Geological Survey, Vermont Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Vermont; David Glover, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

ABSTRACT: Harvest regulations are essential tools that fisheries managers use to alter fish populations and achieve angler satisfaction. Evaluation of regulations is essential but evaluating all regulations for all species in all systems across multiple time periods is not logistically feasible. Thus, a strategic plan that identifies what regulations need to be evaluated where, when, and how can assist effective decision-making. Specifically, an integrated framework of assessment and research (i.e., the portfolio approach) can provide a larger context in which to design, implement, and interpret harvest regulation evaluations. Using examples, we illustrate this multi-step approach. First, a shared vision for individual fisheries (species, system, individual population, goal) that is jointly created by a collaborative group of researchers and managers is essential. Second, using a series of linked questions, objectives, and goals, the collaborative team can conceptualize (a) desired outcomes of specific harvest regulations given population characteristics, (b) challenges to achieving those outcomes, and (c) data needed to differentiate among population responses to regulations. Third, by applying a portfolio of interacting data types (e.g., assessment, applied research, basic science, synthesis), researchers and managers can operationalize a pathway to achieve the desired angler outcome given existing population conditions. Fourth, by using rigorous scientific principles, the team can improve all aspects of assessment and research. Specifically, a strategic plan that considers multiple starting population conditions, a range of harvest regulations, and different angler outcomes can integrate all assessment and research data to better inform management decisions. Fifth, adhering to a set of agreed-upon, regularly-evaluated 10-year goals allows fisheries professionals to track progress and plan next steps. Although agencies face different challenges across species, systems, and populations, all can advance successful science-based management by utilizing components of this portfolio approach for harvest regulation evaluation.

Monday January 28, 2019 4:40pm - 5:00pm EST

Filter sessions
Apply filters to sessions.
  • Main Agenda Item
  • Poster
  • S01: Using Standardized Assessments to Evaluate Harvest Regulations: Advancing Science-Based Fisheries Management
  • S02: Eastern Massasauga Conservation - Management - Recovery
  • S03: Application of environmental DNA-based tools for aquatic invasive species monitoring and management
  • S04: Great Lakes Trophic Structure: Innovations and ongoing studies of predatory fishes
  • S05: Migratory wildlife collisions with manmade structures: monitoring - prevention - patterns from collision data
  • S06: Considering New Paradigms in the Management of Beaver - Trout - Riparian Habitats
  • S07: Use of Acoustic Telemetry to Inform Fisheries Management Across Midwestern US and Canada
  • S08: Science in service to wetlands conservation and wildlife management in the lower Great Lakes region: history - status - state of the art
  • S09: Carbon Dioxide As An Aquatic Resource Management Tool
  • S10: The Ohio Biodiversity Conservation Partnership: An Innovative University-State Agency Partnership for Conservation in Ohio
  • S11: Dreissenid Mussels: Advancements in control - detection - management - biology
  • S12: Reading the aquatic landscape and connecting restoration design
  • S13: Sea Grant role in communicating needs to inform research and conservation
  • S14: Bridging the Gap between Fish and Wildlife: Discussions on Multi-Species Interactions and Ecosystem Stability
  • S15: Collaborating with community members: the human side of fish and wildlife management and research
  • S16: Agriculture and Wildlife Coexistence in the Midwest United States
  • Student Event
  • T01: Fisheries: Great Lakes I
  • T02: Wildlife: Urban-Wildlife Conflict
  • T03: Fisheries: Behavior & Physiology
  • T04: Wildlife: Wetland Conservation
  • T05: Lightning Talk Session: Fisheries
  • T06: Human Dimensions: Fisheries I
  • T07: Fisheries: Rivers & Streams
  • T08: Wildlife: Waterfowl
  • T09: Human Dimensions: Wildlife
  • T10: Fisheries: Invasive Species I
  • T11: Fisheries: Fish Conservation
  • T12: Wildlife: Cervids
  • T13: Fisheries: Habitat
  • T14: Fisheries: Great Lakes II
  • T15: Fisheries: Lakes & Reservoirs
  • T16: Fisheries: Invertebrates
  • T17: Wildlife: Mammals
  • T18: Human Dimensions: Policy & Engagement
  • T19: Fisheries: Early Life History
  • T20: Wildlife: Upland I
  • T21: Fisheries: Invasive Species II
  • T22: Wildlife: Turtles
  • T23: Fisheries: Big Rivers
  • T24: Wildlife: Upland II
  • T25: Fisheries: Techniques
  • T26: Fisheries: Invasive Species III
  • T27: Wildlife: Avian
  • T28: Lightning Talk Session: Wildlife
  • T29: Human Dimensions: Fisheries II
  • Workshop