|
 |
|
Chapter 8: Fish Protocols
| You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to view the Adobe PDF files
on this page. See
EPA's PDF page for more information about getting and using
the free Acrobat Reader. |
This Chapter is divided into two parts: Part A (this file), and Part
B
Monitoring of the fish assemblage is an integral component of many water
quality management programs, and its importance is reflected in the aquatic
life use-support designations of many states. Narrative expressions such
as "maintaining coldwater fisheries", "fishable" or
"fish propagation" are prevalent in state standards. Assessments
of the fish assemblage must measure the overall structure and function
of the ichthyofaunal community to adequately evaluate biological integrity
and protect surface water resource quality. Fish bioassessment data quality
and comparability are assured through the utilization of qualified fisheries
professionals and consistent methods.
The Rapid Bioassessment Protocol (RBP) for fish presented in this document,
is directly comparable to RBP V in Plafkin
et al. (1989). The principal evaluation mechanism utilizes the technical
framework of the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) -- a fish assemblage
assessment approach developed by Karr
(1981). The IBI incorporates the zoogeographic, ecosystem, community
and population aspects of the fish assemblage into a single ecologically-based
index. Calculation and interpretation of the IBI involves a sequence of
activities including: fish sample collection; data tabulation; and regional
modification and calibration of metrics and expectation values. This concept
has provided the overall multimetric index framework for rapid bioassessment
in this document. A more detailed description of this approach for fish
is presented in Karr et al. (1986)
and Ohio EPA (1987). Regional
modification and applications are described in Leonard
and Orth (1986), Moyle et
al. (1986), Hughes
and Gammon (1987), Wade
and Stalcup 1987, Miller
et al. (1988), Steedman (1988),
Simon (1991), Lyons
(1992a), Simon and Lyons
(1995), Lyons et al. (1996),
and Simon (1999).
The RBP for fish involves careful, standardized field collection, species
identification and enumeration, and analyses using aggregated biological
attributes or quantification of the numbers (and in some cases biomass,
see Section 8.3.3, Metric
13) of key species. The role of experienced fisheries scientists in
the adaptation and application of the RBP and the taxonomic identification
of fishes cannot be overemphasized. The fish RBP survey yields an objective
discrete measure of the condition of the fish assemblage. Although the
fish survey can usually be completed in the field by qualified fish biologists,
difficult species identifications will require laboratory confirmation.
Data provided by the fish RBP can serve to assess use attainment, develop
biological criteria, prioritize sites for further evaluation, provide
a reproducible impact assessment, and evaluate status and trends of the
fish assemblage.
Fish collection procedures must focus on a multihabitat approach -- sampling
habitats in relative proportion to their local representation (as determined
during site reconnaissance). Each sample reach should contain riffle,
run and pool habitat, when available. Whenever possible, the reach should
be sampled sufficiently upstream of any bridge or road crossing to minimize
the hydrological effects on overall habitat quality. Wadeability and accessability
may ultimately govern the exact placement of the sample reach. A habitat
assessment is performed and physical/chemical parameters measured concurrently
with fish sampling to document and characterize available habitat specifics
within the sample reach (see Chapter 5: Habitat
Assessment and Physicochemical Characterization).
| 8.1 |
FISH COLLECTION PROCEDURES: ELECTROFISHING |
All fish sampling gear types are generally considered selective to some
degree; however, electrofishing has proven to be the most comprehensive
and effective single method for collecting stream fishes. Pulsed
DC (direct current) electrofishing is the method of choice to obtain a
representative sample of the fish assemblage at each sampling station.
However, electrofishing in any form has been banned from certain salmonid
spawning streams in the northwest. As with any fish sampling method, the
proper scientific collection permit(s) must be obtained before commencement
of any electrofishing activities. The accurate identification of each
fish collected is essential, and species-level identification is required
(including hybrids in some cases, see Section
8.3.3, Metric 11). Field identifications are acceptable; however,
voucher specimens must be retained for laboratory verification, particularly
if there is any doubt about the correct identity of the specimen (see
Section 8.2). Because the collection
methods used are not consistently effective for young-of-the-year fish
and because their inclusion may seasonally skew bioassessment results,
fish less than 20 millimeters total length will not be identified or included
in standard samples.
|
ELECTROFISHING CONFIGURATION AND FIELD TEAM ORGANIZATION
All field team members must be trained in electrofishing safety
precautions and unit operation procedures identified by the electrofishing
unit manufacturer. Each team member must be insulated from the
water and the electrodes; therefore, chest waders and rubber gloves
are required. Electrode and dip net handles must be constructed
of insulating materials (e.g., woods, fiberglass). Electrofishers/electrodes
must be equipped with functional safety switches (as installed by
virtually all electrofisher manufacturers). Field team members must
not reach into the water unless the electrodes have been removed
from the water or the electrofisher has been disengaged.
It is recommended that at least 2 fish collection team members
be certified in CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Many
options exist for electrofisher configuration and field team organization;
however, procedures will always involve pulsed DC electrofishing
and a minimum 2-person team for sampling streams and wadeable rivers.
Examples include:
- Backpack electrofisher with 2 hand-held electrodes mounted on
fiberglass poles, one positive (anode) and one negative (cathode).
One crew member, identified as the electrofisher unit operator,
carries the backpack unit and manipulates both the anode and cathode
poles. The anode may be fitted with a net ring (and shallow net)
to allow the unit operator to net specimens. The remaining 1 or
2 team members net fish with dip nets and are responsible for
specimen transport and care in buckets or livewells.
- Backpack electrofisher with 1 hand-held anode pole and a trailing
or floating cathode. The electrofisher unit operator manipulates
the anode with one hand, and has a second hand free for use of
a dip net. The remaining 1 or 2 team members also aid in the netting
of specimens, and in addition are responsible for specimen transport
in buckets or livewells.
- Tote barge (pramunit) electrofisher with 2 hand-held anode poles
and a trailing/floating cathode (recommended for large streams
and wadeable rivers). Two team members are each equipped with
an anode pole and a dip net. Each is responsible for electrofishing
and the netting of specimens. The remaining team member will follow,
pushing or pulling the barge through the sample reach. A livewell
is maintained within the barge and/or within the sampling reach
but outside the area of electric current.
|
The safety of all personnel and the quality of the data is assured through
the adequate education, training, and experience of all members of the
fish collection team. At least 1 biologist with training and experience
in electrofishing techniques and fish taxonomy must be involved
in each sampling event. Laboratory analyses are conducted and/or supervised
by a fisheries professional trained in fish taxonomy. Quality assurance
and quality control must be a continuous process in fisheries monitoring
and assessment, and must include all program aspects (i.e., field sampling,
habitat measurement, laboratory processing, and data recording).
|
|
| Tote barge (pram
unit) Electrofishing |
Backpack Electrofishing |
| 8.1.1 |
Field Sampling Procedures |
|
FIELD EQUIPMENT/SUPPLIES NEEDED FOR FISH SAMPLING--ELECTROFISHING
- appropriate scientific collection permit(s)
- backpack or tote barge-mounted electrofisher
- dip nets
- block nets (i.e., seines)
- elbow-length insulated waterproof gloves
- chest waders (equipped with wading cleats, when necessary)
- polarized sunglasses
- buckets/livewells
- jars for voucher/reference specimens
- waterproof jar labels
- 10% buffered formalin (formaldehyde solution)
- measuring board (500 mm minimum, with 1 mm increments)a
- balance (gram scale)b
- tape measure (100 m minimum)
- fish Sampling Field Data Sheetc
- applicable topographic maps
- copies of field protocols
- pencils, clipboard
- first aid kit
- Global Positioning System (GPS) Unit
a Needed only
if program/study requires length frequency information
b Needed only
if total biomass and/or the Index of Well-Being are included in
the assessment process (see Section
8.3.3, Metric 13).
c It is helpful
to copy fieldsheets onto water-resistant paper for use in wet weather
conditions.
|
- A representative stream reach (see Alternatives for Stream Reach Designation,
next page) is selected and measured such that primary physical habitat
characteristics of the stream are included within the reach (e.g., riffle,
run and pool habitats, when available). The sample reach should be located
away from the influences of major tributaries and bridge/road crossings
(e.g., sufficiently upstream to decrease influences on overall habitat
quality). The exact location (i.e., latitude and longitude) of the downstream
limit of the reach must be recorded on each field data sheet. (If a
Global Positioning System unit is used to provide location information,
the accuracy or design confidence of the unit should be noted.) A habitat
assessment and physical/ chemical characterization of water quality
should be performed within the same sampling reach (see Chapter
5: Habitat Assessment and Physicochemical Characterization).
- Collection via electrofishing begins at a shallow riffle, or other
physical barrier at the downstream limit of the sample reach, and terminates
at a similar barrier at the upstream end of the reach. In the absence
of physical barriers, block nets should be set at the upstream and downstream
ends of the reach prior to the initiation of any sampling activities.
- Fish collection procedures commence at the downstream barrier. A minimum
2-person fisheries crew proceeds to electrofish in an upstream direction
using a side-to-side or bank-to-bank sweeping technique to maximize
area coverage. All wadeable habitats within the reach are sampled via
a single pass, which terminates at the upstream barrier. Fish are held
in livewells (or buckets) for subsequent identification and enumeration.
|
ALTERNATIVES FOR STREAM REACH DESIGNATION
The collection of a representative sample of the fish assemblage
is essential, and the appropriate sampling station length for
obtaining that sample is best determined by conducting pilot
studies (Lyons 1992b,
Simonson et al.
1994, Simonson
and Lyons 1995). Alternatives for the designation of stream
sampling reaches include:
- Fixed-distance designation--A standard length of
stream, e.g., a 150-200-meter reach (Ohio
EPA 1987), 100-meter reach (Massachusetts
DEP 1995) may be used to obtain a representative sample.
Conceptually, this approach should provide a mixture of habitats
in the reach and provide, at a minimum, duplicate physical
and structural elements such as riffle/pool sequences.
- Proportional-distance designation-- A standard number
of stream channel "widths" may be used to measure
the stream study reach, e.g., 40 times the stream width is
defined by Environmental Monitoring & Assessment Program
(EMAP) for sampling (Klemm
and Lazorchak 1995). This approach allows variation in
the length of the reach based on the size of the stream. Application
of the proportional-distance approach in large streams or
wadeable rivers may require the establishment of sampling
program time and/or distance maxima (e.g., no more than 3
hours of electrofishing or 500-meter reach per sampling site,
[Klemm et al. 1993]).
|
- Sampling efficiency is dependent, at least in part, on water clarity
and the field team's ability to see and net the stunned fish. Therefore,
each team member should wear polarized sunglasses, and sampling is conducted
only during periods of optimal water clarity and flow.
- All fish (greater than 20 millimeters
total length) collected within the sample reach must be identified to
species (or subspecies). Specimens that cannot be identified with
certainty in the field are preserved in a 10% formalin solution and
stored in labeled jars for subsequent laboratory identification (see
Section 8.2). A representative
voucher collection must be retained for unidentified specimens, very
small specimens, new locality records, and/or a particular region. In
addition to the unidentified specimen jar, a voucher collection of a
subsample of each species identified in the field should be preserved
and labeled for subsequent laboratory verification, if necessary. Obviously,
species of special concern (e.g., threatened, endangered) should be
noted and released immediately on site. Labels should contain
(at a minimum) location data (verbal description and coordinates), date,
collectors' names, and sample identification code and/or station numbers
for the particular sampling site. Young-of-the-year fish less than 20
millimeters (total length) are not identified or included in the sample,
and are released on site. Specimens that can be identified in the field
are counted, examined for external anomalies (i.e., deformities, eroded
fins, lesions, and tumors), and recorded on field data sheets. An example
of a "Fish Sampling Field Data Sheet" is provided in Appendix
A-4, Form 1. Space is available for optional fish length and weight
measurements, should a particular program/study require length frequency
or biomass data. However, these data are not required for the
standard multimetric assessment. Space is allotted on the field data
sheets for the optional inclusion of measurements (nearest millimeter
total length) and weights (nearest gram) for a subsample (to a maximum
25 specimens) of each species. Although fish length and weight measurements
are optional, recording a range of lengths for species encountered may
be a useful routine measure. Following the data recording phase of the
procedure, specimens that have been identified and processed in the
field are released on site to minimize mortality.
|
QUALITY CONTROL (QC) IN THE FIELD
- Quality control must be a continuous process in fish bioassessment
and should include all program aspects, from field collection
and preservation to habitat assessment, sample processing, and
data recording. Field validation should be conduced at selected
sites and will involve the collection of a duplicate sample taken
from an adjacent reach upstream of the initial sampling site.
The adjacent reach should be similar to the initial site with
respect to habitat and stressors. Sampling QC data should be evaluated
following the first year of sampling in order to determine a level
of acceptable variability and the appropriate duplication frequency.
- Field identifications of fish must be conducted by qualified/trained
fish taxonomists, familiar with local and regional ichthyofauna.
Questionable records are prevented by: (a) requiring the presence
of at least one experienced/trained fish taxonomist on every field
effort, and (b) preserving selected specimens (e.g., Klemm
and Lazorchak 1995 recommend a subsample of a maximum 25 voucher
specimens of each species) and those that cannot by readily identified
in the field for laboratory verification and/or examination by
a second qualified fish taxonomist (see Section
8.2). Specimens must be properly preserved and labeled (refer
to Section 8.1.1,
number 5). When needed, chain-of-custody forms must be initiated
following sample preservation, and must include the same information
as the sample container labels.
- All field equipment must be in good operating condition, and
a plan for routine inspection, maintenance, and/or calibration
must be developed to ensure consistency and quality of field data.
Field data must be complete and legible, and should be entered
on standardized field data forms and/or digital recorders. While
in the field, the field team should possess sufficient copies
of standardized field data forms and chains-of-custody for all
anticipated sampling sites, as well as copies of all applicable
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
|
- The data collection phase includes the completion of the top portion
of the "Fish Sampling Field Data Sheet" (Appendix
A-4, Form 1), which duplicates selected information from the physical/chemical
field sheet. Information regarding the sample collection procedures
must also be recorded. This includes method of fish capture, start time,
ending time, duration of sampling, maximum and mean stream widths. The
percentage of each habitat type in the reach is estimated and documented
on the data sheet. Comments should include sampling conditions, e.g.,
visibility, flow, difficult access to stream, or anything that may prove
to be valuable information to consider for future sampling events or
by personnel unfamiliar with the site.
| 8.2 |
LABORATORY IDENTIFICATION AND
VERIFICATION |
|
QUALITY CONTROL (QC) FOR TAXONOMY
- A representative voucher collection must be retained for unidentified
specimens, small specimens, and new locality records. In addition,
a second voucher jar should be retained for a subsample of each
species identified in the field (e.g., Klemm
and Lazorchak 1995 recommend a subsample of 25 voucher specimens
of each species). The vouchers must be properly preserved, labeled,
and stored in the laboratory for future reference (see Section
8.2).
- Voucher collections should be verified by a second qualified
fish taxonomist, i.e., a professional other than the taxonomist
responsible for the original field identifications. The word "validated"
and the name of the taxonomist that validated the identification
should be added to each voucher label. Specimens sent from the
laboratory to taxonomic specialists should be recorded in a "Taxonomy
Validation Notebook" (see Chapter
7), noting the label information and date sent. Upon return
of the specimens, the date received and findings should also be
recorded in the notebook (and the voucher label), along with the
name of the person who performed the validation.
- Information on samples completed (through the identification/validation
process) will be tracked in a "Sample Log" notebook,
to track the progress of each sample (Appendix
A-4, Form 2). Sample log entries will be updated as each step
is completed (e.g., receipt, identification, validation, archive).
- A library of taxonomic literature is essential for the aid and
support of identification/verification activities, and must be
maintained (and updated as needed) in the laboratory. A list of
selected taxonomic references is provided in Section
8.4.
|
Fish records of questionable quality are prevented by preserving specimens
(that cannot be readily identified in the field) for laboratory examination
and/or a voucher collection for laboratory verification. Specimens must
be properly preserved (e.g., 10% formalin for tissue fixing and 70% ethanol
for long-term storage) and labeled (using museum-grade archival labels/paper,
and formalin/alcohol-proof pen or pencil). Labels should contain (at a minimum)
site location data (i.e., verbal description and site coordinates), collection
date, collector's names, species identification (for fishes identified in
the field), species totals, and sample identification code and/or station
number. All samples received in the laboratory should be tracked using a
sample log-in procedure (Appendix A-4,
Form 2). Laboratory fisheries professionals must be capable of
identifying fish to the lowest possible taxonomic level (i.e., species or
subspecies) and should have access to suitable regional taxonomic references
(see Section 8.4) to aid in the identification
process. Laboratories that do not typically identify fish, or trained fisheries
professionals that have difficulty identifying a particular specimen or
group of fish, should contact a taxonomic specialist (i.e., a recognized
authority for that particular taxonomic group). Taxonomic nomenclature must
be kept consistent and current. Common and scientific names of fishes from
the United States and Canada are listed in Robins
et al. (1991).
Continue to Ch.
8 (Part B).
|
