Home Who We Are Mission and Goals What We Do Native Species Restoration Aquatic Invasive Species Issues Treaty Fishery Assistance Refuge Fishery Assistance Habitat and Ecosystem Health Station Reports Staff Education and Outreach Employment and Volunteering Contact Us Phone: 989-356-5102 Fax: 989-356-4651 Address: 145 Water Street, Room 204 Alpena, MI 49707

Status of Lake Sturgeon in Michigan Waters of Lake Huron,
Reported by Commercial Fishers 1995-1997

March 1998

Tracy Hill
Fishery Biologist
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fishery Resources Office
Alpena, Michigan
tracy_hill@fws.gov

Provisional data, not to be cited without permission.

 

INTRODUCTION

Lake sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens, one of 27 sturgeon species world wide, has one of the widest geographic ranges of any North American freshwater fish. Its range extends from the St. Lawrence River in the east, to Hudson Bay in the north, west to the North Saskatchewan River in Alberta, and south to the Tennessee River in Alabama (Harkness and Dymond 1961; Scott and Crossman 1973). This ancient family of fishes has been recognized since the Upper Cretaceous period (136 million years ago), at a time when dinosaurs were at the height of their development. Historically, lake sturgeon were an important component of the Lake Huron fish community. A bottom-dwelling coolwater fish, lake sturgeon were abundant in the shallower waters of Lake Huron prior to European settlement of the Great Lakes basin and represent a unique component of the original biological diversity of the lake ecosystem. The North American sturgeon fishery dates back to the last century when lake sturgeon were a highly prized and important staple in the diet of native people (Houston 1987). The species was an important food source to Native American tribes inhabiting the Lake Huron basin (Kinietz 1940). Lake sturgeon were just as important to eastern forest Indian tribes as bison were to the western plains Indians (Ono et al. 1983).

The Great Lakes and their tributaries likely had historically abundant lake sturgeon populations numbering in the hundreds of thousands to millions (Harkness and Dymond 1961; Houston 1987). Lake sturgeon population abundance has dramatically declined in the last 130 years. The population is now estimated to be about 1% of its former size. Overharvest by commercial fishing operations, coupled with the construction of dams on rivers that were historically used for spawning, are the key contributors to the rapid decline of lake sturgeon populations (Ono et al. 1983).

Beginning in the mid 1800s, intensive Great Lakes commercial fishing for lake whitefish and lake trout initiated the decline in lake sturgeon populations. Commercial fishers initially despised incidentally caught lake sturgeon because their external bony plates ripped and destroyed nets. Because the fish had little market value, commercial fishers killed them to prevent net damage (Tody 1974). Fishers removed the sturgeon from their gear and disposed of them by piling them on beaches, burying them for fertilizer, or drying them out for use as fuel in steamship boilers. The value of lake sturgeon soared when it was discovered that the flesh and roe were marketable. By 1860, a market developed for smoked lake sturgeon in Sandusky, Ohio and later expanded to include caviar and isinglass, a gelatinous derivative made from sturgeon swim bladders (Harkness and Dymond 1961). Isinglass was used in preparation of jellies, for clarifying beers and wines, and to make a powerful glue (Holzkamm and McCarthy 1988). Spurred by market demand, other major processing facilities soon sprang up throughout the Great Lakes as the commercial price rose from $0.25/fish to $0.50/kg (Baker 1980). Gill nets, pound nets and trotlines were the primary means of capture (Smith and Snell 1889; Koelz 1926). By 1880, the lake sturgeon industry was thriving in the Great Lakes and Canada. Commercial landings (lakewide) in Lake Huron exceeded 472 metric tons in 1885 (374 metric tons in Ontario), and exceeded 253 metric tons in Michigan waters in 1889 (Baldwin et al. 1979). Before 1900, the greatest annual production of lake sturgeon came out of Lake Erie with 2,134 metric tons (Ono et al. 1983). Lakes St. Clair and Huron were the next closest in annual production, each contributing 454 metric tons. In 1968, nearly the entire 19 metric tons of the total Great Lakes production was taken from the Canadian waters of Lake St. Clair and North Bay, Lake Huron (Ono et al. 1983).

Lake sturgeon are listed as either threatened or endangered by 19 of the 20 states within its original range in the United States (Auer 1991). The American Fisheries Society considers lake sturgeon a threatened species in North America (Williams et al. 1989). Although lake sturgeon are not endangered or even rare in Canada, the threat of serious declines leading to extinction may be imminent if the necessary stock assessments and habitat protection measures are not forthcoming (Houston 1987). Protection of sturgeon in the Ontario waters of Lake Huron consists of closed seasons, size limits, creel limits, and gear restrictions. Currently, commercial harvest in Ontario is controlled by a quota system. No commercial harvest of lake sturgeon is permitted in Michigan waters and sport harvest is limited to one fish per year.

Lake sturgeon are the only sturgeon species endemic to the Great Lakes basin and are the largest fresh water fish indigenous to that system. Lake sturgeon are late-maturing, slow-growing, long-lived fish that reach ages of 100-150 years (Guenette et al. 1993). Published ages at first spawning are usually greater than 13 years for males and greater than 19 years for females (Houston 1987). After sexual maturity is reached, there may be an interval of 2 years between successive spawning in males and 4-6 or even 8-9 years in females (Roussow 1957; Sunde 1961). This spawning periodicity, along with late age of maturation, is a critical feature of the lake sturgeon’s life history and makes them vulnerable to over-exploitation. Spawning occurs in late-April through mid-May throughout their range. In Ontario, spawning has been noted when water temperatures are between 13 to 18EC (Harkness and Dymond 1961) and in Wisconsin from 18 to 23EC (Kempinger 1988). Historically, sturgeon were known to spawn in several locations in Michigan waters of Lake Huron, including the Au Sable River (Goodyear et al. 1982) and at certain locations within Saginaw Bay (Organ et al. 1979). The area in Saginaw Bay was described as a shoal east of a line extending from Sand Point to Fish Point.

The largest recorded lake sturgeon was 2.3 m in length, weighed 141 kg, and was caught in Batchewana Bay, Lake Superior in 1922 (Scott and Crossman 1973). The oldest known specimen was 154 years and weighed 94 kg, it was taken from Lake of the Woods, Minnesota (McKay 1963). Lake sturgeon are benthivores, feeding primarily on small benthic invertebrates such as insect larvae, especially Chironomids, nymphs of Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, and Neuroptera, crayfish, mollusks, fish eggs, fishes, nematodes, leeches, amphipods, decapods, and a few plants (Harkness and Dymond 1961). Sturgeon have an unusual mouth, consisting of a protrusible tube-like appendage that vacuums food and other material from the soft substrate. Sensitive barbels surround the mouth and are used to detect food items.

Sturgeon are of biological interest for several reasons. They occupy an important evolutionary position intermediate between the elasmobranchs and the teleosts, are highly prized as a food fish, are indicators of ecosystem health, and are receiving increased attention because worldwide their numbers are declining (Singer et al. 1990). Although sturgeon are occasionally reported by sport and commercial fishers and recreational divers, essentially no quantitative information is available on the current status of the species in Lake Huron. In 1995, the Lake Huron Committee (LHC) published the Fish-Community Objectives for Lake Huron in which the stated objectives for lake sturgeon were 1) to increase the abundance of lake sturgeon to the extent that the species is removed from its threatened status in U.S. waters, and 2) to maintain or rehabilitate populations in Canadian waters (DesJardine et al. 1995). To address these objectives the Lake Huron Technical Committee (LHTC) completed an update on the present status of the principal fish stocks in Lake Huron, including lake sturgeon (Krueger et al. 1995). Unfortunately, very little is known regarding the current status of lake sturgeon in either U.S. or Canadian waters of Lake Huron, making development of plans for recovery difficult. To begin assembling critical information on Lake Huron lake sturgeon, necessary for determination of federal listing and development of recovery plans, the Alpena Fishery Resources Office (FRO) initiated a sturgeon project in 1995. This report summarizes the activities of that project from 1995 through 1997.

 

STUDY SITE

Lake Huron is the second largest (by surface area) of the Great Lakes with a total surface area of 59,596 km2 and a total volume of 3,540 km3. It lies in the center of the Great Lakes and receives discharge from both Lakes Superior and Michigan (Eshenroder et al. 1992). Discharge from Lake Michigan is through the Straits of Mackinac and the outflow from Lake Superior is through the St. Marys River (Berst and Spangler 1973). The Bruce Peninsula and the islands of Manitoulin group separate the lake into three relatively discrete basins Georgian Bay (15,108 km2), North Channel (3,950 km2) and main basin (23,595 km2 in the United States and 16,917 km2 in Canada). The lake lies within three distinct geologic formations. Along the North Channel and northeastern side of Georgian Bay the bedrock is primarily composed of Precambrian Shield. A Niagara limestone formation extends northwest from the Bruce Peninsula through Manitoulin, Cockburn, and Drummond Islands to the Straits of Mackinac. The remainder of Lake Huron lies within the Paleozoic rock formation (Eshenroder et al. 1992). The northern portion of the Lake Huron watershed is forested land, while farmland dominates the lower watershed (Berst and Spangler 1973). The basin ranks second lowest of the Great Lakes in number of human inhabitants (2.69 million).

Lake Huron is a deep oligotrophic lake, with a mean depth of 59 m and depths greater than approximately 30 m over two-thirds of its surface (Berst and Spangler 1973). The lake begins to thermally stratify in late-June and has a well-defined thermocline at depths generally between 15 and 30 m in July and August. In open waters, summer temperatures in the surface layer are usually in the range of 15E-20EC (Bratsel et al. 1977). However, upwellings of cold , hypolimnetic waters are frequent on the more-exposed main-basin shores (DesJardine et al. 1995). The main basin of Lake Huron usually remains ice free in the winter except near shore. Pack ice covers Georgian Bay, and the North Channel freezes completely (Ebener 1995).

A majority of the lake sturgeon collected during this study came from Saginaw Bay; therefore, a detailed description of the bay is provided. Saginaw Bay is a shallow, well-mixed extension of the western shoreline of Lake Huron. Total area of the bay is 2,771 km2, and total water volume is 24.5 km3. The bay is divided into an inner and outer region by a line extending along its narrowest width (21 km) from Sand Point to Point Lookout (Johengen et al. 1995). A broad shoal and several islands along this line provide a natural demarcation between the two regions. The inner bay has a mean depth of 5.1 m, is nutrient-rich, and is heavily influenced by input from the Saginaw River. The outer bay has a mean depth of 13.7 m and is influenced by the colder, nutrient-poor waters of Lake Huron. Bottom substrates in Saginaw Bay range from silt to mostly cobble and rock.

 

METHODS

Although commercial fishers and Scuba divers occasionally report large sturgeon in northern Lake Huron, all major tributaries thought to have historically supported sturgeon spawning (Cheboygan, Thunder Bay, and Au Sable) have been blocked by hydro-power projects and provide little if any spawning habitat. Commercial fishers from Saginaw Bay indicated that lake sturgeon are occasionally encountered as by-catch in trap nets during normal fishing operations. In addition to the probability that the Saginaw River and its major tributaries probably supported some degree of lake sturgeon spawning, there are published reports of reef spawning activities in Saginaw Bay (Organ et al. 1979; Goodyear et al. 1982).

Since 1995, the Alpena FRO in cooperation with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) and commercial fishers in Saginaw Bay, have been involved in a tagging program to assemble crucial information on relative abundance, movement, and life history of Lake Huron lake sturgeon. Initially, the Bay Port Fish Company (BPFC), Bay Port, Michigan agreed to collect biological data on incidentally captured lake sturgeon. To minimize stress to the fish, fishers from BPFC agreed to apply tags to the fish immediately upon removal from their nets. From 1995 through August 1996, Floy Cinch-up tags (Model FT4, Floy Tag & Manufacturing, Inc., Seattle, Washington) were applied to all captured lake sturgeon. The tags were inserted through the musculature posterior to the dorsal fin. In September 1996, the Floy tag was replaced with a Monel self-piercing animal ear tag (National Band and Tag CO., Newport, Kentucky) that was attached to the left operculum of the lake sturgeon. Self-addressed lake sturgeon data cards were distributed to state-licensed commercial fishers operating in Saginaw Bay by MDNR personnel regulating the commercial fishery. Distribution of the data cards was viewed as a means to increase the number of fishers participating in the lake sturgeon project and enhance documentation of tag recaptures. Fishers were asked to assist with the project by completing the cards and returning them to the Alpena FRO.

State-licensed commercial fishers in Saginaw Bay use large commercial trap nets to capture fishes. Lake whitefish Coregonus clupeaformis, yellow perch Perca flavescens, and channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus are the species primarily targeted by the trap net fishery. Trap nets are of similar design, but exact measurement of the nets may vary slightly among individual fishers. Most commercial fishers use two sizes of trap nets, small yellow perch trap nets and large lake whitefish trap nets. In general, pots on lake whitefish nets are 12.2 m long by 4.9 to 7.6 m wide by 3.7 to 4.6 m deep, with 182.9 m leads. Yellow perch nets have pots that are 3.7 m long by 3.4 to 4.6 m wide by 2.4 to 3.0 m deep, with 182.9 m leads. The lead and wings converge at a series of one or more chambers (hearts) that incorporate the net entrance and tunnel leading to the pot (Figure 1). The trap nets consist of tarred nylon with mesh sizes (stretched measure) of 6.4 to 10.2 cm in the pot and 11.4 to 22.9 cm in the leads. The fishing season for the trap net fishery is generally April to December. April is usually the earliest month fished because fishers prefer not to set nets until the lake is ice-free. Fishing effort is reduced in November, because the lake whitefish season is closed and winter storms and ice preclude fishing thereafter until spring.

 

Figure 1. Diagram of a typical Great Lakes trap net in the Saginaw Bay commercial fishery (Schorfhaar and Peck 1993). In general, pots on lake whitefish nets are 12.2 m long by 4.9 to 7.6 m wide by 3.7 to 4.6 m deep, with 182.9 m leads. Yellow perch nets have pots that are 3.7 m long by 3.4 to 4.6 m wide by 2.3 to 3.0 m deep, with 182.9 m leads. The trap net s consist of tarred nylon with mesh sizes (stretched measure) of 6.4 to 10.2 cm in the pot and 11.4 to 22.9 cm in the lead.

 

Total length (TL), fork length (FL), and girth were measured for all captured lake sturgeon. Weights were recorded when possible. Sectioning of the pectoral fin ray is an accurate and non-lethal method for estimating age of lake sturgeon (Rossiter et al. 1995), and is employed by both Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources - Lake Huron Management Unit (OMNR-LHMU) and MDNR. Therefore, in July 1997, commercial fishers were provided materials and instructions necessary for removing pectoral fin rays from captured lake sturgeon. The leading (marginal) ray of the left pectoral fin was removed from each fish to provide estimates of age. Abiotic data recorded for each lake sturgeon captured include; latitude/longitude, water depth, date, gear type, and mesh size. In addition, the tag type, agency, and identification number of tag applied to or observed on the fish was also recorded.

To maximize the information being collected on Lake Huron lake sturgeon, a similar effort was initiated in Ontario waters by the OMNR-LHMU in 1995. Coordination between OMNR-LHMU and the Alpena FRO resulted in standardized data collection that allowed development of a common database. This coordination, transferred through the respective commercial fishers, enhanced the chances of recovering tag information from both sides of the lake and allowed a better understanding of the seasonal movement patterns of Lake Huron lake sturgeon.

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The number of Michigan state-licensed commercial fishers assisting with the lake sturgeon project has increased each year (Table 1). Currently, 10 commercial fishers (operating 16 boats) are involved in the project, eight of these fishers operate in Saginaw Bay. Biological data were recorded for 112 lake sturgeon captured by commercial fishers from 1995 to 1997. Length of these fish ranged from 46 to 188 cm (TL) with a mean length of 110 cm (Figure 2). The total number of lake sturgeon captured and tagged has increased each year of the project. Tags have been attached to 90 fish. Twelve lake sturgeon have been captured outside Saginaw Bay (Barbeaux Fishery, Detour and Gauthier-Spaulding Fishery, Roger City). Several biotic parameters were collected to assist with data exchange among agencies involved in lake sturgeon status surveys. Several relationships were developed to aid information exchange between the agencies. Figures 3 and 4 illustrate total length-fork length and total length-girth relationships, respectively. The girth-weight relationship was calculated from a sample of 12 lake sturgeon collected from Michigan waters of Lake Huron (Figure 5). This relationship is similar to girth-weight relationships reported for other lake sturgeon populations (Threader and Brousseau 1986; Slade and Rose 1994). Twenty-four of the 53 lake sturgeon captured in 1997 had pectoral fin rays removed for aging. These fish ranged in age from 4 to 72 years with a mean age of 17.3 years. The age-length relationship is given by Figure 6. This relationship is similar to the age-length relationship reported for the Moose River, Ontario lake sturgeon population (Threader and Brousseau 1986).

 

Table 1. Number of lake sturgeon encountered as by-catch by participating commercial fishers in Lake Huron trap net fishery since 1995. Numbers in parenthesis represent the number of fish tagged.

 

 

Figure 2. Length frequency of lake sturgeon captured as by catch in the Lake Huron trap net fishery, 1995-1997.

Figure 3. Total length to fork length relationships for lake sturgeon sampled by Michigan state-licensed commercial fishers from Lake Huron, 1995-1997.

 

 

Figure 4. Total length to girth relationship for lake sturgeon sampled by Michigan state-licensed commercial fishers from Lake Huron, 1995-1997.

 

 

Figure 5. Girth to weight relationship for lake sturgeon sampled by Michigan state-licensed commercial fishers from Lake Huron, 1995-1997.

 

Figure 6. Age to length relationship for lake sturgeon sampled by Michigan state-licensed commercial fishers from Lake Huron in 1997.

Eight previously tagged lake sturgeon have been recaptured (Table 2). All recaptured fish were released unharmed. Coordination between OMNR-LHMU and the Alpena FRO on the lake sturgeon project in Lake Huron has provided documentation of interbasin movement of sturgeon (four fish). Two lake sturgeon tagged by Ontario commercial fishers (tag numbers 161 and 285) were recaptured by Michigan commercial fishers and two tagged by a Michigan fisher (tag numbers 4036 and 4041) were recaptured by an Ontario fisher (Table 2). Fish 4033 and 4036 were both tagged in western Saginaw Bay in early 1997 by Serafin Fishery. These fish were recaptured in the fall of 1997 in southern Lake Huron by Purdy's Fishery. Fish 161 and 285 tagged by Ontario fishers in June 1996 and October 1996, respectively were recaptured by Michigan fishers in October 1997 and July 1997, respectively. Lake sturgeon 161 and 49 were at large just over a year (16 and 14 months, respectively) prior to recapture; all other sturgeon were at large less than one year prior to recapture.

 

Table 2. Summary of lake sturgeon recapture information.

 

Although areas in Saginaw Bay where lake sturgeon have been encountered as by-catch are biased by commercial fishing operations, there seem to be areas where sturgeon are captured more frequently (Figure 7). The area in eastern Saginaw Bay north of Sand Point (grid 1509) accounts for 19% of the total lake sturgeon captures, and is close to the location reported as a lake spawning site for sturgeon in the early 1900's (Organ et al. 1978). Another area of interest is located at the mouth of the Rifle River (grid 1507) where 13 lake sturgeon have been captured. Thirty percent of the fish have been captured in the middle of Saginaw Bay (grid 1508). This location may, however, be primarily a result of the amount of effort that commercial fishers spend in this area targeting lake whitefish (J. Serafin, Whytes Fishery, personal communication). A majority of the lake sturgeon (89%) were captured in small-mesh (5.1-7.6cm) trap nets fished in the shallower waters of the inner bay. Average water depth in Saginaw Bay where lake sturgeon were captured was 6.1 m. Depths ranged from 2.1 to 16.2 m. The average water depth in northern Lake Huron where lake sturgeon were captured was 17.5 m, with a range of 2.4 to 31.4 m. These water depths are consistent with reports of general lake sturgeon occurrence (Priegel and Wirth 1977; Ono et al 1983; Houston 1987). Although previous authors have referenced seasonal movement patterns that may reflect temperature selection (Ono et al 1983), or possible association with prey abundance (Houston 1987), no such trends are distinguishable from these data. Clustered capture sites will be used in future years to assist in identifying focal points for more extensive sampling and for collection of habitat data.

 

Figure 7. Location of Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron lake sturgeon captures as reported by Michigan state-licensed commercial fishers, 1995-1997.

 

Data collected to date on the Saginaw Bay lake sturgeon are primarily from the fishing locations selected by the fishers seeking target species. There are, however, temporal differences in habitat overlap between lake sturgeon and the commercially targeted species. The greatest overlap occurs in the spring and fall period. Lake sturgeon are captured most frequently in May and October (Figure 8). This temporal information may prove useful is developing sampling protocol for assessment activities targeting lake sturgeon.

 

Figure 8. Number of lake sturgeon captured by Michigan state-licensed commercial fishers, 1995-1997.

 

 

SUMMARY

The excellent cooperation and assistance provided by Michigan state-licensed commercial fishers provided crucial information on the lake sturgeon populations in Saginaw Bay and northern areas of Lake Huron. Lake sturgeon appear to be less abundant in U.S. waters of Lake Huron than in Canadian waters based on by-catch return data. This is not surprising given that historically important spawning streams in Michigan have been blocked by hydro-power projects. A number of large streams with available spawning habitat are still free-flowing in Ontario, providing some degree of sustainability for lake sturgeon populations.

Increasing participation by state-licensed commercial fishers should result in an escalation of lake sturgeon reports over the next few years. With more fishers involved in the tagging operation, additional information on seasonal movement should result from increased recaptures of previously tagged fish. In addition, collaboration between OMNR-LHMU and the Alpena FRO on the lake sturgeon project has begun to define movements of tagged sturgeon among the different basins of Lake Huron.

Despite the limited number of reported lake sturgeon (112), a few discernible biotic and abiotic trends are developing. Personal discussions with the fishers indicate that small lake sturgeon have been observed in years prior to the initiation of this project. Although the mean age of captured lake sturgeon is 17.3 years, this mean was calculated from a small number of fish and may not represent the true age structure of the sturgeon population. Continued collection of information should provide evidence of local recruitment in Michigan waters of Lake Huron if it is occurring. In addition, a few clusters of lake sturgeon captures are identifying areas that should be more closely examined for their habitat value to existing lake sturgeon populations and the possibility of supporting successful lake spawning stocks.

Expansion of the Alpena FRO and OMNR-LHMU efforts for lake sturgeon status surveys in the next few years will aid in the development of a better understanding of the current status, and the potential for a successful lake-wide recovery effort for this important native species.

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The information presented in this report was collected entirely though the voluntary assistance of Barbeaux Fishery, Bay Port Fish Company, Beardsley Fish Company, Cederville Fish Company, Gauthier-Spaulding Fishery, Lentz Fishery, Sam's Fishery, Serafin Fishery, Beers Fishery, and Whytes Fishery. Their cooperation, interest, and enthusiasm continues to be invaluable in defining the current status and trends of this native Lake Huron fish species. The authors wish to thank the Michigan Department of Natural Resources for initiating the mailing of data cards to the state-licensed commercial fishers, Chris Castiglione for assistance with GIS graphics, Scott Koproski for field assistance, Sheral Steadman for development of the report cover, and Dave Willis and Dave Fielder for report review.

 

REFERENCES

Auer, N.A. 1991. Conservation of the threatened lake sturgeon. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Nongame Wildlife Fund and Living Resources Small Grants Program. Final Report, Lansing.

Baker, J.P. 1980. The distribution, ecology, and management of the lake sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens Rafinesque, in Michigan. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Division Report Number 1883, Lansing.

Baldwin, N.S., R.W. Saalfeld, M.A. Ross, and H.J. Buettner. 1979. Commercial fish production in the Great Lake 1867-1977. Great Lakes Fishery Commission Technical Report 3, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Berst, A.H., and G.R. Spangler. 1973. Lake Huron-the ecology of the fish community and man's effects on it. Great Lakes Fishery Commission Technical Report 3, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Bratsel, M.P.J., M.E. Thompson, and R.J. Bowden. 1977. The waters of lake Huron and Lake Superior. Volume 2, Parts A and B, Lake Huron, Georgian Bay and the North Channel. Report to the International Joint Commission by the Upper Lakes Reference Group, Windsor, Ontario.

DesJardine, R.L., T.K. Gorenflo, N.R. Payne, and J.D. Schrouder. 1995. Fish-community objectives for Lake Huron. Great Lakes Fishery Commission Special Publication 95-1, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Ebener, M.P. 1995. History. Pages 9-20. In M.P. Ebener, editor. The state of Lake Huron in 1992. Great Lakes Fishery Commission Special Publication 95-2, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Eshenroder, R.L., D.W. Coble, R.E. Bruesewitz, T.W. Fratt, and J.W. Scheirer. 1992. Decline of lake trout in Lake Huron. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 121:548-554.

Goodyear, C.S., T.A. Edsall, D.M. Ormsby Dempsey, G.D. Moss, and P.E. Polanski. 1982. Atlas of the spawning and nursery areas of Great Lakes fishes. Volume 5, Lake Huron. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.

Guenette, S., R. Fortin, and E. Rassart. 1993. Mitochondrial DNA variation in lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) from the St. Lawrence River and James Bay drainage basins in Quebec, Canada. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50:659-664.

Harkness, W.J.K., and J.R. Dymond. 1961. The lake sturgeon. Ontario Department of Lands and Forests, Toronto, Ontario.

Holzkamm, T., and M. McCarthy. 1988. Potential fishery for lake sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens, as indicated by the return of the Hudson's Bay Company Lac la Pluie District. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 45:921-923.

Houston, J.J. 1987. Status of the Lake Sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens, in Canada. Field-Naturalist 101:171-185.

Johengen, T.H., T.F. Nalepa, G.L. Fahnenstiel, and G. Goudy. 1995. Nutrient changes in Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron, after the establishment of the zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha. Journal of Great Lakes Research 21:449-464.

Kempinger, J.J. 1988. Spawning and early life history of lake sturgeon in the Lake Winnebago system, Wisconsin. American Fisheries Society Symposium 5:110-122.

Kinietz, W.V. 1940. The Indians of the western Great Lakes, 1615-1760. Ann Arbor Paperbacks, University of Michigan Press.

Koelz, W. 1926. Fishing industry of the Great Lakes. U.S. Commercial Fisheries Report for 1925:553-617.

Krueger, K.M., K.S. Schrouder, J.P. Baker, M.P. Ebener, and J.R. McClain. 1995. Status of cool-water fishes in 1992. Pages 73-85. In M.P. Ebener, editor. The state of Lake Huron in 1992. Great Lakes Fishery Commission Special Publication 95-2, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

McKay, H.H. 1963. Fishes of Ontario. Ontario Department of Lands and Forests. Bryant Press Ltd., Toronto.

Ono, R.D., J.D. Wagner, and A. Wagner. 1983. Vanishing Fishes of North America. Stone Wall Press, Washington.

Organ, W.L., G.L. Towns, M.O. Walter, R.B. Pelletier, and D.A. Riege. 1979. Past and presently known spawning grounds of fishes in the Michigan coastal waters of the Great Lakes. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Division, Technical Report 79-1, Lansing.

Priegel, G.R. and T.L. Wirth. 1977. The lake sturgeon: it's life history, ecology and management. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Publication 4-3600(77), Madison.

Rossiter, A., D.L.G. Noakes, and F.W.H. Beamish. 1995. Validation of age estimation for the lake sturgeon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 124:777-781.

Roussow, G. 1957. Some considerations concerning sturgeon spawning periodicity. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 14:553-572.

Schorfharr, R.G., and J.W. Peck. 1993. Catch and mortality of non-target species in lake whitefish trap nets in Michigan Waters of Lake Superior. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Fisheries Division, Research Report Number 1974, Lansing.

Scott, W.B., and E.J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada. Bulletin 184. Ottawa, Ontario.

Singer, T.D., V.G. Mahadevappa, and J.S. Ballantyne. 1990. Aspects of the energy metabolism of lake sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens, with special emphasis on lipid and ketone body metabolism. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 47:873-881.

Slade, J.W., and J.D. Rose. 1994. Population characteristics of Bad River lake sturgeon. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ashland Fishery Resources Office, Ashland, Wisconsin.

Smith, H.M., and M.M. Snell. 1889. Fisheries of the Great Lakes in 1885. Report Committee for 1887. U.S. Commercial Fish and Fisheries.

Sunde, L.A. 1961. Growth and reproduction of the lake sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens Rafinesque, of the Nelson River in Manitoba. Master's Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Threader, R.W., and C.S. Brousseau. 1986. Biology and management of the lake sturgeon in the Moose River, Ontario. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 6:383-390.

Tody, W.H. 1974. Whitefish, sturgeon, and the early Michigan commercial fishery. Pages 45-60 in Michigan Fisheries Centennial Report 1873-1973. Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Lansing.

Williams, J.E., J.E. Johnson, D.A. Hendrickson, S. Contreras-Balderas, J.D. Williams, M.Navarro-Mendoza, D.E. McAllister, and J.E. Deacon. 1989. Fishes of North America, endangered, threatened, or of special concern. Fisheries 17(6):2-20.

---

Back to Top

Last updated: July 8, 2008

Midwest Region Home

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Home Page | Department of the Interior  | USA.gov  | About the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service  | Accessibility  | Privacy  | Notices  | Disclaimer  | FOIA