|
| |
|
|
|
Fisheries of the Roanoke
|
Abstracts
from the 1999 Annual Meeting of the American Fisheries Society
(AFS)
www.fisheries.org
Used with
Permission
|
|
|
History
of the Fish and Fisheries of the Roanoke River
Organizer: James R. Jackson
Moderator: James R. Jackson
|
|
|
|
|
The Roanoke River:
Star of the
Mid-Atlantic
David K. Whitehurst* and Jeffrey B. Trollinger (Virginia
Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, 4010 West Broad Street,
Richmond, VA 23230-1104; 804/367-1000; FAX 804/367-0488; dwhitehurst@dgif.state.va.us,
jtrollinger@dgif.state.va.us)
The Roanoke River originates in the Ridge and Valley Province
of western Virginia, intertwined with the headwaters of the James
River and the tributaries of the New River. Beginning at over
3000-feet elevation it travels southeast through the Blue Ridge,
Piedmont and Coastal Plain provinces, ending at Albemarle Sound in
eastern North Carolina. Most of the drainage is still forested or
in agriculture with less than one percent of the total drainage
urbanized. Along its 442-mile length it passes through five major
reservoirs, over three-quarters of a million people and
approximately 10,000 square miles of land area. The Roanoke River
basin contains approximately 119 species of fish including 6
endemic species and 7 species with special status. The largest
intact bottomland forest ecosystem remaining in the Mid-Atlantic
Region exists below Roanoke Rapids Reservoir. Rich in history and
biological resources, the Roanoke, or Staunton River as it is
known along certain parts, stretches from the tributaries of the
Ohio River to the Atlantic and encompasses the wide diversity of
the people and environments of Virginia and North Carolina.
|
|
(Top of Page)
|
|
|
|
|
Historical Trends in American
Ichthyology and the
Description of the Roanoke River Fish Fauna
James R. Jackson* (Department of Zoology, Campus Box 7617, N.C.
State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7617; 919/515-6146; FAX
919/515-5327; jrjacks2@unity.ncsu.edu)
Historical trends in the rate of publication of the original
descriptions of currently recognized freshwater species native to
the Roanoke River, VA/NC mirror those for the description of the
freshwater fish fauna of North America as a whole. A period of
rapid growth in the number of recognized fish species was
initiated in the early 1800's with the works of S.L. Mitchill,
C.A. LeSueur, and C.S. Rafinesque, followed in the second half of
the century by key workers such as C.F. Girard, E.D. Cope, and
D.S. Jordan. Many of the species native to the Roanoke River were
described by these workers from specimens from other localities,
although Cope and Jordan did conduct important regional surveys
that included portions of the Roanoke. While more than 90% of the
species native to the Roanoke had been described by 1900, the
majority of those species endemic to the river were not discovered
until after 1940, largely through the efforts of E.C. Raney and
his coworkers. Historical patterns in the description of the
Roanoke River fish fauna and those workers important to it provide
a characteristic example of the growth of ichthyology in America.
|
|
(Top of Page)
|
|
|
|
|
History of the Roanoke River
Fish Fauna
William E. Ensign* (Department of Biological and Physical
Sciences, Kennesaw State University, 1000 Chastain Road, Kennesaw,
GA 30144; 770/499-3505; FAX 770/423-6625; bensign@ksumail.kennesaw.edu)
Robert E. Jenkins (Department of Biology, Roanoke College,
Salem, VA 24153; 540/375-2462; jenkins@roanoke.edu)
The best current estimate of ichthyofaunal richness in the
Roanoke River places the total number of species at 119. Of these,
82 are native freshwater forms, 27 are presumed introduced, and 10
are estuarine or diadromous. Faunal additions have been both
intentional (65%) and accidental (35%). Twenty-four percent of the
introductions occurred before 1900, 12% in the period from 1900 to
1950 and 48% since 1950. Fish with recognized recreational or
commercial interest comprise 72% of the non-native fauna.
Intentional introduction by fisheries agencies accounts for 48% of
the introduced fauna. Although no species have been extirpated
from the drainage, 10% of the native fauna have either state or
federal TES status. Even though no species have been lost,
anthropogenic disturbance has probably resulted in significant
range reductions for many of the obligate riverine fishes. Most
importantly, a series of five reservoirs constructed during the
period from 1951 to 1964 has altered much of the large river
habitat originally found in the piedmont and upper coastal plain
regions of the drainage.
|
|
(Top of Page)
|
|
|
|
|
Names of Water:
Native American Fisheries of the
Roanoke and Eastern North Carolina
David Griffith* (Institute for Coastal and Marine Resources and
Department of Anthropology, East Carolina University, Greenville,
NC 27858; 252/757-6779; FAX 252/328-1748; griffithd@mail.ecu.edu)
Native Americans reached North Carolina's coast between eight
and ten thousand years ago, when the coastline itself was less
accessible than in later time periods. Over time, several
different Native American groups began incorporating fishing and
other water-based resource exploitation into their ways of life,
adapting to changes in the coastline as the barrier islands formed
and the lands east of the Suffolk Scarp became more accessible.
This presentation discusses the changes that took place prior to
and immediately after early European explorations of Virginia and
the Carolinas, considering Native American interactions with the
coastal environment in light of Algonquin names of bodies of water
and coastal formations.
|
|
(Top of Page)
|
|
|
|
|
Early
Fisheries, Oily Fisheries: Herring and Other
Fishing in Colonial North Carolina
David Griffith* (Institute for Coastal and Marine Resources and
Department of Anthropology, East Carolina University, Greenville,
NC 27858; 252/757-6779; FAX 252/328-1748; griffithd@mail.ecu.edu)
Herring fishing emerged in conjunction with the plantation and
other agriculture in Eastern North Carolina, assuming an important
role in export trade in the early colonial economy. Herring that
were captured, dried, and salted in North Carolina waters fed
enslaved and free populations throughout the south, the Caribbean,
and in many places in Europe, providing high quality protein that
lasted long time periods without the benefit of refrigeration.
This presentation discusses the ways in which the great herring
and shad fisheries were linked to colonial lifeways and how they
differed from whaling from North Carolina's Outer Banks, the
colony's other important fishery.
|
|
(Top of Page)
|
|
|
|
|
Historical Impacts of Fishing Versus Habitat Loss on
American Shad and River Herring in the Roanoke River, North
Carolina
Joseph E. Hightower* (USGS-Biological Resources Division, North
Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Campus Box
7617, N.C. State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7617; 919/515-8836;
FAX 919-515-4454; jhightower@ncsu.edu)
The Roanoke and Chowan rivers and Albemarle Sound in eastern
North Carolina once supported vast runs of American shad, blueback
herring and alewife. These species supported major commercial
fisheries in the late 1800s; however, current landings are at
record low levels. Historical documents provide some insights into
relative importance of habitat loss versus overfishing in
producing these declines. Anecdotal evidence from the mid to late
1800s suggests that fishing reduced these populations
substantially, using simple but effective gears such as haul
seines, gill nets, pound nets, and fish slides. Intensive fishing
in Albemarle Sound also obscured effects of habitat loss due to
dam construction, because fish were harvested before reaching
spawning grounds. Historical catch-per-unit-effort data during the
mid to late 1800s provide some evidence of intensive fishing, but
changes in fishing practices make assessment difficult with
existing data. Annual landings of American shad in the late 1800s
were well above the estimated sustainable yield, prior to
decreases in spawning habitat due to dam construction. Landings
dropped sharply in the early 1900s and have continued to decline.
Current landings and estimated abundance are well below expected
levels based on available habitat.
|
|
(Top of Page)
|
|
|
|
|
History of Postcolonial Striped Bass Fisheries:
Albemarle Sound and Tributaries
R. Wilson Laney* (South Atlantic Fisheries Resources
Coordination Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box
33683, Raleigh, NC 27636-3683; 919/515-5019; FAX 919/515-4454; R4FR_SAFCNC@FWS.GOV)
James W. Kornegay (North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, Division of Boating and Inland Fisheries, 306 Japonica
Drive, Camden, NC 27921; 252/338-3607; kornegjw@mail.wildlife.state.nc.us)
Sara E. Winslow (North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, Division of Marine Fisheries, 1367 Highway 17
South, Elizabeth City, NC 27909; 252/264-3911; FAX 252/264-3723; Sara_Winslow@mail.enr.state.nc.us)
Striped bass have historically been and remain important in
commercial and recreational fisheries of the Roanoke and other
Albemarle Sound tributaries. The stock has been highly exploited
since development of fisheries in the ecosystem. Early
postcolonial fisheries employed haul seines, fish slides, angling,
and "fishing machines". Haul seines were the chief gear
on the Roanoke River in the late 1800s, with pound nets accounting
for the bulk of the sound catch. Gill nets were employed on the
river and played a major role in harvest in the first half of the
nineteenth century, along with bow nets. Development of intensive
commercial and recreational fisheries, with few regulations,
resulted in harvests as high as 1.3 million pounds as late as the
1960s, with fairly high catches into the 1970s. In the 1980s, the
stock declined severely and catches diminished. Fishing rates were
likely as high as 83% annual removal (F=1.8). With the imposition
of regulations which controlled harvest quotas and reduced fishing
mortality, as well as implementation of a modified Roanoke River
flow regime, the stock rebounded. Stock monitoring is conducted by
the two state fishery management agencies. The stock was declared
"recovered" in 1997, and continues to be closely
monitored.
|
|
(Top of Page)
|
|
|
|
|
Tales of the
Dammed: Reservoir Fisheries of the Roanoke
River
John J. Ney* (Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences,
Virginia Tech University, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0321; 540/231-7292;
FAX 540/231-7580; jney@vt.edu)
Five dams, operated for hydroelectric and/or flood control,
impound 55% of the 340-km middle segment of the Roanoke River. The
resulting reservoirs total 40,000 surface ha and provide highly
popular sport fisheries in south-central VIrginia and adjacent
North Carolina. Fish assemblages in all reservoirs are similar,
with major fisheries for black basses Micropterus spp. and striped
bass Morone saxatilis supported by clupeid (pelagic) and
centrarchid (littoral) forage fishes; fisheries for ictalurids and
centrarchid panfishes are substantial in several reservoirs. This
series of reservoirs exhibits a downstream gradient of increasing
primary productivity offset by rapidly decreasing water retention
times; consequently, overall fisheries productivity shows no
spatial gradient. Fisheries management of these systems has
evolved from emphasis on stocking and regulations to concern about
habitat quality as influenced by activities in the watershed and
dam operation. Current issues include nuisance species
introductions, intensified shoreline development, and conflicts
among user groups.
|
|
(Top of Page)
|
|
|
|
|
Roanoke River Watershed Management and the Future of
Anadromous Fisheries
Roger A. Rulifson* (East Carolina University, Greenville, NC
27858-4353; 252/328-1757; FAX 252/328-4265; Rulifsonr@mail.ecu.edu)
Charles S. Manooch, III (Southeast Fisheries Center, National
Marine Fisheries Service, Beaufort, NC 28516-9722; 252/728-8716;
FAX 252/728-8784; cmanooch@hatteras.bea.nmfs.gov)
The Roanoke River watershed is considered to be the largest
intact, and least disturbed, bottomland hardwood forest ecosystem
remaining in the Mid-Atlantic Region. A series of dams combined
with increased demands on the resource for industry, private
development, and water supply threaten the integrity of the
watershed thereby diminishing quality and quantity of fishery
habitat. The Roanoke River Water Flow Committee was formed in the
late 1980s to document watershed resources and offer suggestions
on ways to preserve or enhance remaining resources. Some species,
such as striped bass, have rebounded from near collapse while
other species, notably American shad, remain at threshold levels.
Although the state has made strides in adopting a holistic
watershed management approach, much more needs to be done to allow
fishery management agencies the latitude to manage Roanoke fishery
resources effectively. Recent state government efforts to bring
industry and development to northeastern counties without
evaluating environmental consequences threaten to undo decades of
a stock restoration program for striped bass in this watershed.
|
|
(Top of Page)
|
|
|
|
