manitoba state of the environment...

Asian Carp in Manitoba ENVR 4000: Sustainable Water Management

Group: Travis Durhack, Lauren Hayhurst, Dylan Lyng & Daniel Seburn6th December 2012

Table of Contents

1. Background 3

I. Aquatic Invasive Species 3II. Origin, Introduction & Distribution 4III. Asian Carp Species Descriptions 5

2. Impacts 6

I. Common Carp vs. Asian Carp 7II. Positive Effects 9III. Negative Effects 9

3. Management of AIS 10

I. North American Legislation 10i. Canada 10ii. United States of America 11

II. U.S.A Management Methods 11III. Canadian Management Methods – Cootes Paradise 13

4. Research 14

I. Susceptibility of Manitoba 14II. Future Predictions 17

5. Recommendations for Manitoba 20

I. Pathways of Introduction to Manitoba 20II. Sustainable Water Management 21

References 24

List of Figures 27

Acknowledgements 27

Asian Carp in Manitoba 2

Asian Carp

1. BACKGROUND

I. Aquatic Invasive Species

Aquatic invasive species, or AIS, are defined as accidentally or intentionally introduced organisms that out-compete native species for resources in their aquatic environments. Asian carp species are deemed “great” aquatic invaders for their sheer reproductive efficiency: occupying water bodies at enormous capacities and consuming immense amounts of food, as they effectively push out native fish populations pound per hundred pounds. Asian carp are renowned for their broad range of environmental tolerances and success in habitats disturbed by human activities (Koehn et al., 2000).

The “intermediate disturbance hypothesis” describes why introduced species tend to become established in disturbed areas – with Asian carp perfectly fitting the criteria. Unaltered habitats are often moderately disturbed by natural events, and showcase the highest species richness and diversity, as environmental variation keeps populations in check and prevents any one species from dominating others. Human actions take the form of increased disturbance or decreased disturbance in aquatic environments. Increased disturbance has been linked to the stress and extinction of sensitive species from the affected area, while decreased disturbance – such as the control of water flow near hydro-electric operations – provides the opportunity for species that prefer stable conditions to dominate the new environmental regime. Human activity in the diversion and regulation of water flow decreases natural disturbances and aids in AIS establishment in the modified and now stable environments (Koehn et al., 2000).

Human-initiated habitat disturbances represent prime areas for opportunistic intruders to flourish: “the invasion of carp has been associated with habitat disturbance caused by development and environmental exploitation” (Koehn et al., 2000). These disturbances often occur in close proximity to areas of large human populations: with the modification and control of river flows to provide constant urban water supply, irrigation and hydro-electricity to meet the needs of the expanding populations; resulting nutrient enrichment and pollution of surrounding waterways; and vegetation removal for recreation, industry and aesthetic purposes. Asian carp thrive in these highly disturbed sites, “the ability of carp to survive periods of poor water quality gives the species a competitive advantage over many native fish species” (Koehn et al., 2000).

“The biology and ecology of carp are two of the major reasons for their success as a vertebrate pest” (Koehn et al., 2000), they are morphologically designed to occupy and thrive in less-than-ideal aquatic environments, which commonly result from human actions.

Many conservationists, scientists and people interested in native fish, including recreational and commercial fishers believe that carp are often used as a

scapegoat and are blamed for environmental problems which have other causes.– Koehn et al., 2000

The alteration of natural areas for the development of: water resources, timber harvesting, wetland drainage, sedimentation, overfishing, habitat degradation or removal, introduction of exotic plant and animal species, and pollution, occurred prior to – or concurrently with – the invasion of Asian carp (Koehn et al., 2000). These AIS were introduced into and achieved success within these already affected aquatic ecosystems. Since humans perfectly altered the environment for this species, essentially assisting the spread of these invaders, it is not a question of if they will arrive in Manitoba but when, and what can be done now to mitigate the future impacts of Asian carp in the province.


II. Origin, Introduction & Distribution

Asian carp originated from their native expansive pacific drainages in eastern Asia. Intentionally stocked in ponds in the U.S.A in the 1960s and 70s, Asian carp moved to hatcheries and sewage lagoons, and then into natural waterways in the 1980s.

Silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix) were initially imported in 1973 by a private fish farmer in Arkansas, and stocked in ponds to control phytoplankton. By the late 1970s Silver carp had been stocked in multiple municipal sewage lagoons, private fish hatcheries, and aquaculture facilities, from which they escaped and were found in rivers by 1980 (USGS H. molitrix, 2011).

Bighead carp (Hypophthalmichthys nobilis) were first introduced in the U.S.A in 1972 by a private fish farmer in Arkansas, in an effort to improve water quality of culture ponds to increase fish production. The species escaped from its locations in Arkansas in the thousands during flooding events, and was also introduced in the 1980s from the states of Kansas, Colorado and California, where Bighead carp had been illegally stocked (USGS H. nobilis, 2011).

Grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) were imported in 1963 in Alabama and Arkansas, and expanded their range through both authorized and unauthorized stockings in ponds for biological control of vegetation (USGS C. idella, 2011). Fish escaped the Fish Farming Experimental Station in Arkansas in the 1970s, and were further assisted in their movement by stocking efforts in lakes and reservoirs that were connected to river systems. In addition to natural dispersal, the species has spread rapidly over the decades as a result of expansive research projects, stocking by government agencies, interstate transport, escapes from farm ponds and aquaculture facilities, and illegal release by individuals (USGS C. idella, 2011). This stocking of Grass carp for their use as biological control agents against aquatic vegetation continues to date.

Black carp (Mylopharyngodon piceus) were introduced to the U.S.A in the early 1970s as a “contaminant” in shipments of imported Grass carp sent to a private fish farm in Arkansas (USGS M. piceus, 2011). Additional introductions occurred in the early 1980s, with Black carp being brought in as a biological control agent in aquaculture operations. This species escaped into natural waterways in 1994, when 30-plus Black carp along with thousands of Bighead carp moved into the Missouri River drainage – a result of a flooding event affecting hatchery ponds at an aquaculture facility. Further to the flooded escapees, hundreds of Black carp fingerlings were accidentally included in live baitfish shipments sent from Arkansas to Missouri from 1994 on. Also, juveniles of this species are difficult to distinguish from juvenile Grass carp and may be misidentified and inadvertently stocked in some areas (USGS M. piceus, 2011).

Figure 1: Distribution of Bighead carp in the U.S.A. Figure 2: Distribution of Common carp in the U.S.A.


Asian carp were found in Mississippi waters in 1980 – this was a combined result of intentional cultural “good luck” live release practices and unintentional emptying of bait buckets and flooding of aquaculture fish farm operations in the U.S.A. These four species are now distributed across the country and have been reported in as many as 45 states, with the exception of the following: Alaska, Maine, Montana, Rhode Island and Vermont (USGS C. idella, 2011).

III. Asian Carp Species Descriptions

The term “Asian carp” generally refers to the species of Silver, Bighead, Grass and Black carp, all native to Asia. The well-known Common carp (Cyprinus carpio) is often placed in a separate category, as it originated in Eurasia and was embraced throughout Asia and Europe thousands of years before its arrival in North America: as early as 1831. This Eurasian relative is also referred to separately due to its duration of introduction, existence and impacts within North America (see Table 1: Comparison of Carp Species).

Media use of “Asian carp” typically refers to the notorious Silver carp, which grow to one metre in length and can weigh up to 100 pounds. These are the “flying carp”, as experienced in many states, as the fish occur in such high densities in areas that the vibrations by passing boat motors force the fish to jump out of the water – often injuriously. The Silver carp is a filter-feeder and preys excessively on plankton, but will also consume bacteria and detritus. It was intentionally introduced in sewage lagoons and aquaculture ponds, taking advantage of its feeding preferences to improve water quality (USGS H. molitrix, 2011).

Bighead carp grow to 1.4 metres in length and, similar to Silver carp, filter-feed immensely on plankton and prefer large river habitats. It is used worldwide as a food fish and is also commonly stocked in culture ponds and sewage lagoons, despite studies which have not confirmed that Bighead carp actually do improve water quality (USGS H. nobilis, 2011).

Grass carp grow to 1.25 metres and prefer the shallows of low-flow water bodies such as lakes, ponds and backwaters of large rivers, where they consume huge amounts of aquatic vegetation. Fish fry have been reported to tolerate a temperature range of 0 to 40°C, and fingerlings have been noted to survive five months under heavy ice cover (USGS C. idella, 2011). This species has been declared “likely to enter Manitoba soon” – with Grass carp recently introduced into Alberta – in the Manitoba Government’s State of the Environment Report from 1993.

The Grass carp, similar to the Common carp, was recently introduced into southern Alberta to clean out aquatic weeds in irrigation canals. Although more than 90

percent of the carp were sterilized, some escaped from their enclosures and may have found their way into natural waterways connected to the Saskatchewan River.

– State of the Environment Report, 1993.This species has also been collected from Lake Huron and Lake Ontario, having entered Canada in the past but not having established a breeding population (USGS C. idella, 2011).

Black carp grow to over 1.5 metres and 150 pounds, and as long as 2.2 metres, and can live over 15 years. They are a bottom-dwelling molluscivore: studies have revealed them to be a hundred percent effective in reducing native snail and mussel populations. This species has been recently proposed as a biological control for aquatic invading Zebra mussels, though there is no experimental evidence to support the effectiveness of Black carp in reducing Zebra mussel numbers (USGS M. piceus, 2011).


Table 1: Comparison of Carp SpeciesSpecies Common Carp Silver Carp Bighead Carp Grass Carp Black CarpBACKGROUNDCountry of origin Eurasia Asia Asia Asia AsiaDate of introduction 1831 1973 1972 1963 Early 1970sInitial state of introduction New York Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas ArkansasReason for introduction Popularity Control of

plankton blooms in reservoirs & bio-filtration of sewage lagoons

Improve water quality of culture ponds

Stocking by private owners & public groups for weed control

Biological control agent for parasitemanagement in cultured catfish & used as a food fish

Number of inhabited states 48 16 23 45 5Occurrence in Canada British Columbia,

Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario & Quebec, since the late 1880s

None reported

Five caught in Lake Erie between 1995 & 2003

Alberta & Saskatchewan; Fewer than 10 occurrences in Ontario

None reported

CHARACTERISTICSLength 1.2 metres 1 metre 1.4 metres 1.25 metres 1.5-2.2 metresWeight Up to 94 lbs Up to 100 lbs Up to 110 lbs Up to 79 lbs Up to 150 lbsPreferred habitat Shallow; vegetated

waters near vegetated shoreline-wetland

Wide variety Wide variety Shallow; vegetated

0 to 10 m; freshwater rivers, streams & lakes

Diet Omnivore - Benthivore

Omnivore - Planktivore

Planktivore Aquatic vegetation

Molluscivore

Consumption rate per day 20% (young) to 2% (adult) weight

5-20% of its weight

5-20% of its weight

100% (young) to 25% (adult)

40% of its weight

References: USGS (2011) Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database – Fact Sheets.

To date, the U.S.A has focused on Silver and Bighead carp species – which are observably the most invasive and destructive strains for the area – and in their management, aim to encompass the other species of Asian carp.

2. IMPACTS

The impacts of Asian carp, specifically Silver and Bighead carp, are difficult to predict because of their place in the food web. These species grow quickly to a large size and feed at low levels of the food chain – acting as an energy trap. By voraciously consuming plankton in water bodies, these AIS have the potential to out-compete native fish fry for food, causing a decline in native fish populations (USGS H. molitrix & H. nobilis, 2011). These species would also be a potential competitor for the plankton resource, against adults of some native fishes – with recorded reduced weights in native species of Bigmouth buffalo and Gizzard shad (Flesher, 2012). In sheer numbers, through reproductive success and morphological size and weight, Silver and Bighead carp have the potential to cause enormous damage and physically force out native fish species, as each individual is capable of occupying a metre and a hundred pounds of aquatic ecosystem (USGS H. molitrix & H. nobilis, 2011).

Contrastingly, presence of Grass carp in a water body has been shown to benefit plankton-centred communities, while instead injuring native species that rely on vegetation structure for food, cover or spawning substrate. Grass carp have been shown to indirectly affect native species by decreasing density and variation of the vegetation – altering the trophic web for plants, invertebrates and fish that depend on


detritus, macrophyte structure, and attached algae (USGS C. idella, 2011). Grass carp increase the population of phytoplankton through consumption of plant material: of which, only half is digested and the rest released into the water. This is both beneficial and harmful to species such as Rainbow trout, who feed on the higher production of plankton, but are then easier for cormorants to predate with the lack of vegetative cover. Another effect of the feeding habits of Grass carp is nutrient enrichment: resulting in an increase in algal blooms and a decrease in water quality (USGS C. idella, 2011).

Black carp have a high potential to negatively impact aquatic ecosystems, as they feed on populations of native – often endangered – snails and mussels. Their immense size and diet allow for their undisputed success in depleting shelled organism populations through predation, which in turn reduces the amount of algae-consuming organisms in a water body, decreasing water quality (USGS M. piceus, 2011).

Asian carp species, and their Common carp relative, are particularly tolerant to poor water quality, high turbidity, moderate salinities, and low oxygen levels. They also have higher tolerances to toxicants than many other species. Though scientists fear an invasion of Asian carp would devastate native fishes and aquatic ecosystems, studies note there has been minimal negative change in major fish populations to date – despite Asian carp making up over 60 percent of the biomass in the Illinois River (Flesher, 2012).

I. Common Carp vs. Asian Carp

Table 2: Common Carp vs. Asian Carp ImpactsIMPACTS Positive Negative

Com

mon

Car

p

KNOWN- Past widespread popularity as a food fish- Hugely symbolic in Asian culture- Ornamental varieties are kept for decorative purposes

KNOWN- Widespread abundance- Destroy vegetation and stunt the growth of aquatic plants- Increase water turbidity and decrease water and habitat quality through feeding and reproductive behaviours- Harshly deteriorate stream, channel and wetland habitat for species requiring rooted vegetation and clear water - Occasionally prey on the eggs of native fish species - Compete with ecologically similar species such as Bigmouth buffalo- Decrease waterfowl and fish populations in areas- Reduce aquatic ecosystem health and function- Total degradation of aquatic environments- Difficult and expensive to eliminate

POTENTIAL- Utilization of this over-abundant and inexpensive fish as protein substitute- Easily acquired

POTENTIAL- Implicated in the disappearance of native fish species, in the destruction of spawning grounds

Silv

er C

arp

KNOWN- Stocked for phytoplankton control in eutrophic water bodies- Reduce nutrients in sewage lagoons

KNOWN- Cause injuries to recreational boaters and fishers- Damage nets and fishing equipment, where they occur in large numbers

POTENTIAL- Potential for mass export to China- Increase in tourism in areas for recreational flying fish tournaments- Legislation in some states to carry firearms on watercrafts

POTENTIAL- Reproductive success and large size may force out native species in occupied areas- Large numbers coupled with immense intake of plankton may cause damage to native fish species- Potential to successfully out-compete other planktivorous species such as Bigmouth buffalo and Gizzard shad- May reduce fish fry populations by consuming plankton

Continued on following page.


IMPACTS Positive Negative

Big

head

Car

pKNOWN

- Most popular food fish world-wideKNOWN

- Cause damage to nets and fishing equipmentPOTENTIAL

- May improve water quality in pondsPOTENTIAL

- Reproductive success and large size may force out native species in occupied areas- Potential to deplete zooplankton populations- May cause a decline in species that rely on plankton for food: including larval fish, some adult fish species and native mussel populations

Gra

ss C

arp

KNOWN- Used to control invasive aquatic plant species- Continue to be stocked in ponds and lakes as biological control to remove nuisance weeds- Very efficient in depleting aquatic vegetation- Vegetation removal leads to better growth of some native species due to increases in phytoplankton and zooplankton production

KNOWN- Significantly alter the food web and trophic structure of aquatic systems by inducing changes in plant, invertebrate and fish communities- Decrease the density and composition of plants- Decrease the diversity and density of organisms that require structured littoral habitats and feed on detritus, macrophytes or attached algae- Interspecific competition for food with native fish and invertebrate species - Direct influences of predation or competition when plant food is scarce- Removal of vegetation can have negative effects on native fish: elimination of food sources, shelter, and spawning substrates- Lead to higher predation on some species by birds due to lack of cover- Cause changes in diet, density and growth of native fishes- Feed on preferred plants instead of target species on occasion- Digest only half of the plant material consumed each day, remaining material is expelled into the water, which leads to nutrient enrichment and promotes algal blooms, reducing water clarity and decreasing oxygen levels

POTENTIAL- Organisms requiring limnetic habitat or food webs based on plankton may benefit from Grass carp presence

POTENTIAL- May carry parasites and diseases transmissible to native fishes- May have been indirectly responsible for the infection of the endangered Woundfin

Bla

ck C

arp

KNOWN- Food fish- Biological control agent for grub and snails in aquaculture operations

KNOWN- Capable of eliminating up to 100 percent of the snails in a water body

POTENTIAL- Proposed biological control for invasive Zebra mussel species

POTENTIAL- High potential to affect aquatic communities by reducing populations of native mussels and snails- Many predated mussels and snails are considered endangered or threatened - May restructure benthic communities by consuming snails, which eat algae, thereby increasing algae in the system and decreasing water quality- May cause significant declines in mollusk populations in North American streams and lakes- Lifespan of over 15 years would allow even sterile males to persist and predate large quantities of mussels and snails


References: USGS (2011) Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database – Fact Sheets.Common carp have been in Canada since the late 1880s; a once-highly desirable food fish, their image has been tainted in the wake of their wetland- and marsh-destroying, and bottom-feeding characteristics. Current management for this species’ presence in Lake Manitoba occurs in the form of culverts across channel openings to the attached Delta Marsh. A seven-year project was conducted by Ducks Unlimited and the University of Manitoba to assess ideal widths to space the bars apart for installation of these culverts, as well as ideal timing to put the bars in place. This effort ensured almost all larger native fish individuals, including most walleye, could continue to spawn in the marsh, while restricting passage of larger, damaging and invasive Common carp (Gordon Goldsborough). Adult Common carp are notoriously wider than most native fish species, so they cannot pass through the bars that allow smaller – or skinnier – fish access to preferential spawning grounds in the summer. The barred culverts still allow for juvenile carp to enter, however these cause substantially less damage in their feeding and (lack of) reproductive behaviours. Unfortunately, Asian carp species of concern occur at a range of sizes and widths, which would overlap native fish species’ and render setup of a barred culvert system ineffective, in event that Asian carp take up residence in any of Manitoba’s marshes.

II. Positive Effects

Asian carp presence in the United States has resulted in some positive economic and environmental contribution – open to debate. Asian carp species, particularly the problematic and easy-to-catch Silver carp have found use in cheap bait production for crayfish and lobsters, as well as pulverized at a few processing plants into fertilizers and a high-quality protein source in pet foods (Ohlson, 2011).

Small quantities of Asian carp have been sold in areas of the United States for consumption, and bolder restaurants from New Orleans to Chicago are revolutionizing applications of this “Shanghai Bass” on menus (Hamilton, 2010). “Carp has all the health benefits associated with eating fish and, since it eats low on the food chain, has few contaminants such as mercury that tend to be concentrated in the flesh of other fish species” (Ohlson, 2011), though public perception in North America does not hold carp in the same prized regard as China . Despite largely negative media attention, Asian carp are valued by some recreational fishers: with entire tournaments and tourism operations now dedicated to the sport and excitement of literally shooting fish as they jump out of the water.

Currently in the works is the harvesting and export of the Asian fish back to Asia, with a potential for mass export opportunities in the future. A carp processing plant being constructed in Illinois – as part of a $10 million state investment – will employ up to 40 individuals, but national support could create as many as 200 jobs and export 100 million pounds annually (Jonsson, 2012).

Some ecologists aren’t keen on the fishery idea, saying it is in effect an abdication to the invasion, which is expected to deplete native fish species and could entrench the carp not only in U.S. waters, but also in local business, tradition, and culture.

– The Christian Science MonitorDespite the contrasting views, new agreements made with China could result in shipments of invasive Silver carp turning at the very least a localised – if not national – profit. With potential economic benefits, and the environmental realization that all species of Asian carp fry may be important components of the diets of large native fish species, Asian carp present some positive impacts from their human-induced introduction. Use of Asian carp within a fishery, or en masse in any application, could represent partial relief towards the potential negative impacts of Asian carp on native fish species and habitat.

III. Negative Effects

Asian carp contribute to negative environmental and economical effects in the aquatic ecosystems they invade. Silver and Bighead carp species eat vast amount of plankton, which many of the native fish


species (such as lake trout and walleye) depend on as a food source when they are young fry (Chung, 2012). This large amount of plankton consumed by massive schools of these huge invaders would likely cause many native filter-feeding fish species to suffer and potentially experience a reduction in numbers, through lack of available food resource. This loss of smaller feeder fish in the ecosystem would, in turn, affect the larger fish in the area that rely on feeder fish as food, such as walleye, musky and trout.

In addition to the immense consumption rates, all carp species grow at a very quick rate. This quick growth leads to many large carp in a short amount of time, which means an even higher consumption of food, and less resource available for native species. These fish are also “prolific breeders” (Chung), capable of laying millions of eggs in their multiple spawning seasons each year, assisting in their competitive advantage over native species.

With the possibility of large populations of Asian carp invading, there are also health concerns for the local fish populations. Asian carp, especially Grass carp (see Table 2), are known carriers of disease. One such disease that could be transmitted by the carp is the Asian tapeworm, which has already infected native fish populations – including endangered species in areas of North America (Mandrak & Cudmore, 2004). Along with the possible spread of Asian tapeworm to Manitoba’s fish populations, Silver carp are known to be very susceptible to Spring Viraemia of Carp Virus (SVCV). This disease can be spread to other carp species, as well as vulnerable local cyprinids (Mandrak & Cudmore).

Silver carp have made the news for injuring recreational boaters, water-skiers and fishermen, as it flies through the air when disturbed by boat motors. This species, as well as Bighead carp, also cause irreparable damage to fishing equipment and nets where they occur in large numbers. All this damage has an enormous price tag, with the United States spending billions of dollars every year, and devoting specific state policy to combating these metre-long writhing garburators.

3. MANAGEMENT OF AIS

AIS are a problem throughout the world, and North America is no exception. The legislation within each country varies: each country also has their own methods for preventing and mitigating the problems of AIS, although in some cases – such as with Asian carp – Canada and the States work together to create a management system with solutions to all involved.

I. North American Legislation

i. CanadaThere are more AIS entering Canada than ever before. It is believed that every decade, around 15 new aquatic species arrive in Canadian coastal or inland waters, and with the absence of their natural predators, aggressive species tend to rapidly expand and reproduce (Canadian Council of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministers Aquatic Invasive Species Task Group [CCFA], 2004). These alien species can radically alter natural habitats, rendering them inhospitable for the native species. Canada has 20 percent of the world's fresh water and a huge coastline, making it at a high risk from invasive species (CCFA).

Countries around the world officially recognized the threat posed by invasive species in 1992, with the UN Convention on Biodiversity (CCFA). Canada’s answer to this came in 1995, with the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy and in September 2001, the federal, provincial and territorial ministers of forests, fisheries and aquaculture, endangered species, and wildlife agreed to develop a Canadian plan to deal with the threat of invasive alien species (CCFA). In 2002, the Canadian Council of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministers created the Aquatic Invasive Species Task Group to develop an action plan to address the threat of aquatic invasive species (CCFA). This task group created the document: A Canadian


Action Plan to Address the Threat of Aquatic Invasive Species in 2004, which is now considered Canada’s plan for dealing with aquatic invasive species.

The Action Plan outlines what the government believes to be the most effective approach to dealing with the species that are – and future species that could become – established in Canada. This involves managing the pathways through which invasive species enter and spread through Canadian waters including: shipping, recreational and commercial boats; the use of live bait; the aquarium and water garden trade; live food fish trade; unauthorized introductions and transfers; and canals and water diversions (CCFA). The ultimate goal of this plan is to minimize or eliminate the introduction of harmful AIS, and manage and reverse the impact of the AIS already found in Canada. The Action Plan’s fundamental principles include incorporating environmental, economic, and social factors in the decision making; using scientific techniques to assess the risks of aquatic invasive species; and working cooperatively with all of the stakeholders (CCFA). The prevention of harmful new invasions is the first priority, since this is the simplest, most cost-effective and environmentally protective way of dealing with the problem. Once these invasive species are established, the job of removing them becomes much more difficult and costly.

ii. United States of AmericaThe United States has many regulations and controls in place for dealing with AIS, and is far ahead of Canadian action. The three that deal the most with the Asian carp invasion are: the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, the Clean Boating Act of 2008, and the Asian Carp Prevention and Control Act (United States Department of Agriculture, 2012).

The Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 officially declared invasive species to be a problem and laid the baseline for the U.S. to control and manage aquatic invasive species. For many years this act was the regulation for how the United States dealt with their invasive species, but with an increase in AIS being introduced, the Senate approved the Clean Boating Act of 2008, which was “an Act to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to address certain discharges incidental to the normal operation of a recreational vessel” (U.S Environmental Protection Agency, 2008).

In 2010, another act was amended to address the growing problem of the Asian carp as an invasive species: the Asian Carp Prevention and Control Act was introduced “to prohibit the importation and shipment of certain species of carp” (U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 2010). This newest act has paved the way for management and restoration projects in areas such as the Great Lakes and Illinois River, to begin removal of Asian carp and attempt to return affected areas back to their natural state.

II. U.S.A Management Methods

The United States of America has long provided a blue print for invasive species management and legislative action plans. It took little time for U.S. politicians to realize the economic, ecological, and health impacts that were being brought on by increased introduction and spread of invasive species. In 1999 president Clinton signed an executive order designed to control and prevent the introduction of invasive species (Nature Serve). Since the signing of this document, billions upon billions of dollars have been spent on prevention, mediation, and remediation projects in North America.

Many forms of management methods for Asian carp have been tested and established in the states mostly dealing with the mediation of Carp once they’re in the water body. Most recently, the Great Lakes Commission has proposed a barrier project looking to restore the natural divide between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River. The Great Lakes Commission has already built an electric barrier 40 miles from Lake Michigan in the Chicago channel and it has been successful in protecting the Great Lakes from


invading Asian carp. Even though electric barriers have proven efficient the proposed Great Divide Barrier(s) will place a price tag upwards of $9 billion over a 50-year period (Greco, 2012). So the use of electric fences have proven to be successful but at a large monetary cost.

More numerous forms of management approaches were designed around societal participation. The states have increased promotion of recreational activities such as Asian carp fishing events like the “Red-Neck Fishing Derby” on the Mississippi River (Shriver, 2012). Over the two-day fishing derby, upwards of 11,000 Asian carp were eradicated from the Mississippi River, with only a few red-necks injured (Lindell, 2012). Some AIS sports have even gained tourist attraction status: bringing avid fisherman and hunters alike from around North America to participate bowfishing or shooting Asian carp. Indiana has enacted into law, a program that allows shotguns on watercraft for shooting carp on the Wabash River (HB 1279), while the state of Illinois is geared to allow shotguns on boats for the 2013 fishing season:

Synopsis as Introduced: Amends the Fish and Aquatic Life Code. Provides that the Department of Natural Resources shall establish an Asian carp pilot program to

permit licensed individuals to shoot Asian carp with a shotgun off of a motorboat in the Illinois River beginning with the 2013 licensing year. Provides that the individuals must have the appropriate license and use a specific type of ammunition.

– Bill Status of HB 5317, Illinois General AssemblyThe rapid increase in recreational activities has worked to decrease Asian carp numbers locally for a period of time, as well as promote the education of aquatic invasive species across North America.

Another method of slowing Carp incursion is to mass market the fish species to restaurants across the U.S. This particular method of control has already been established for another invasive species, the Rusty crayfish (Gunderson, 2008). Marketing Asian carp cuisine has already begun in many kitchens with the help of Schafer Fisheries Distributors who have been granted hundreds of thousands of dollars in state grant money for Asian carp processing equipment to aid in promoting mass catching and higher demand for Asian carp cuisine (Sula, 2010). However the taste for Asian carp has yet to satisfy the palate of the American people, so discussion of exporting the fish to China where demand for Asian carp is already present has been explored.

The U.S. federal government has been working in cooperation with many AIS organizations, such as the Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee, and USGS (United States Geological Survey) to continue to research and develop new technological designs to stop the spread of Asian carp. In the past year there have been many tribulations in bringing these technologies to the forefront and two in particular are discussed below.

A fish processing plant in Grafton, Illinois is currently waiting for federal funding to commence full time processing and packaging of Asian carp pellets. The concept is to introduce Asian carp pellets into the agricultural realm to be utilized as a source of food for the more demanded animal cuisine in America (Mann, 2012). To date there has been a minimal amount of research toward long-term effects of farm animals being raised on carp, but once funding is provided further research will be implemented.

In La Crosse Wisconsin, biologists working at the USGS’s Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Centre have designed acoustic technology that can be utilized to herd Asian carp where they can then be easily netted. The USGS “water gun” fires sound pressure waves into the water at forces upwards of 2,000 pounds per square inch (Geyer, 2012). The biologists at USGS are currently waiting for federal approval to test their design in an uncontrolled outdoor setting. If successful their plan is to mass distribute to the water guns to all environmental agencies and wildlife services in the United States.

As described above, the U.S. is a leader in management methods for Asian carp control. Their waterways have long been under attack by hundreds of AIS. This history provides background knowledge of Asian


carp behaviour and deficiencies, but because a large number of water bodies have been overrun, prevention is not a focused method in their management plan. It has also been shown that due to their methods of mitigation, all approaches come with massive monetary sacrifices and large political support.

III. Canadian Management Methods – Cootes Paradise

One successful Canadian example of carp management is found at the mouth of the Desjardins Canal. This is the only channel that connects Cootes Paradise and Hamilton Harbour, and the local, provincial and federal governments combined efforts with environmental organizations to build a Fishway at this location (Royal Botanical Gardens [RBG]). The Cootes Paradise Fishway is the Great Lakes' first two-way Fishway, as well as a carp barrier. It is one of the most obvious indicators of the progress of Project Paradise: an environmental project designed to clean up Lake Ontario beginning with the carp invasion (RBG). Prior to the installation of the Fishway, the adult population of carp in Cootes Paradise was estimated to be nearly 70,000 (RBG).

The Fishway became operational in 1997 and was designed to keep the invasive carp out of Cootes Paradise while also maintaining proper water flow and movement of the populations of native aquatic species (RBG). Carp and other native fish migrate in and out of the marsh through the Desjardins Canal: every fall, all of the fish leave the marsh to winter in the deep waters of Hamilton Harbour, and in spring they migrate back into the shallow marsh to spawn (Stewart, 2002). The Fishway is designed to guide the fish in and out of the marsh with little interference to their normal migration patterns.

The Fishway consists of two major components: the first is a barrier with grates that prevent large fish like the carp from making their way into Cootes Paradise, but still allows water and small native species to pass through freely. Since the barrier blocks large native fish as well as carp, the Fishway is also equipped with a manually operated sorting section to ensure that all of the native fish species can pass to their reproductive habitat. The Fishway has large baskets that catch the large fish which are designed to hold water along with the fish. These baskets are then hoisted to the deck of the Fishway, where the fish are sorted by hand. The carp are released back into Hamilton Harbour, while the native fish and other aquatic organisms are sent along into the marsh (Stewart).

During the Fishway's first year of operation, 95 percent of the 70,000 carp were removed from the marsh and this number has continued to drop since then; recent monitoring has found less than 1,000 adult carp in the marsh annually (RBG). Unfortunately, ongoing fish kills in adjacent Hamilton Harbour due to impaired oxygen levels and fish diseases such as VHS, which arrived in 2007, continue to suppress fish numbers, despite improved marsh reproductive habitat.

Figure 3: Decline in Asian carp species encountered in the marsh.

Along with the Fishway, other recovery methods have been put in place; both to help prevent the Asian Carp from getting into the area, as well as to repair the damage that they have done. In January 2000, the Royal Botanical Gardens implemented a wetland restoration project whereby used Christmas trees from


the past Christmas season were collected by the local municipalities and were arranged to create a natural barrier in the water in an attempt to restore the shoreline of the creek (Stewart, 2002). Along with the pine trees, which protect the creek bed and banks from carp movement, small fish grates were also set up along the barrier to maintain the natural flow of water and promote native wetland organisms (Stewart 2002).

4. RESEARCH

I. Susceptibility of Manitoba

One of the most important factors to consider when evaluating the likelihood of Asian carp colonizing Manitoban waters, is whether the province’s lakes would have adequate conditions to support the populations. Cooke and Hill (2010) investigated the conditions upon which Silver carp and Bighead carp species would thrive based on bioenergetic modelling. The study was designed to assess basic metabolic requirements of Silver and Bighead carp for varying sizes of fish in different environments. The goal of the study was to assess the viability of Asian carp invading the Laurentian Great Lakes, but the results also indicate that populations would be able to thrive if they were introduced into Manitoban waters.

Based on their models, the most important environmental variables influencing metabolic activity and growth of Asian carp are planktonic food resources and water temperature (Cooke and Hill, 2010). Each of the major basins and tributaries of the Laurentian Great Lakes were analyzed for predicted increases or reduction in biomass of Asian carp based on the conditions in each location (see Table 3). The models predicted net growth for Asian carp in Green Bay, where average temperatures were 13.4°C and 20.3°C in April and June, respectively, and average phytoplankton wet mass was 5.5mg/L (see highlighted fields). Comparing these results to conditions in Manitoba’s major water body, Lake Winnipeg, similar temperatures and planktonic food resources are available for certain years (see Table 4 & Figure 4).

Table 3: Predicted changes in biomass of Bighead (BC) and Silver carp (SC) for various locations within the Laurentian Great Lakes based on bioenergetic models. Highlighted fields indicate temperature conditions and average phytoplankton biomass that result in predicted growth for all sizes of carp (Cooke & Hill, 2010).

Based on the State of Lake Winnipeg Report (2011) there was an average summer mean temperature range of 17.9°C – 21.5°C, and mean phytoplankton biomass values ranged between 6,000mg/m3 and


12,000mg/m3 over the years 2004 to 2006. By converting the phytoplankton wet mass in Green Bay to the appropriate units (5.5 mg/L * 1000L/m3 = 5,500 mg/m3) we see similar temperature and greater phytoplankton biomass values existed at Lake Winnipeg as compared to Green Bay, where Asian carp of all sizes were predicted to thrive. Therefore, these predictions show that conditions in Lake Winnipeg could be viable for the development of a reproducing population of Asian carp.

Table 4: Summer mean temperature data for Lake Winnipeg over the years 1999-2007 (Environment Canada, 2011).

Figure 4: Mean annual phytoplankton biomass for Lake Winnipeg from 1999-2007.

Another study on wetlands in the Interlake region of Manitoba also indicates the phytoplankton concentration in Manitoba is sufficient for sustaining and possibly developing reproducing populations of Asian carp. The monitoring was carried out by Gabor et al. (1989) in experimental enclosures in the Interlake and the results indicate that phytoplankton concentration of between eight and 24 mg/m3 could be expected in this region (1μg/cm3 = 10mg/m3; see Figure 5). With similar climactic conditions to Lake Winnipeg, survival of Asian carp is likely within the Interlake, while development of reproducing populations is possible but not as likely.

Figure 5: Mean Phytoplankton concentration (chlorophyll α) in experimental enclosures in the Interlake region, Manitoba.


Another reliable method for predicting suitable habitat for invasive species is by ecological niche modelling (Chen P et al., 2007). The models work by comparing the hydrologic and climactic environmental conditions in the native range for a given species, to the current conditions in a region where the species could potentially invade. In order to improve the accuracy of the predictions multiple models can be used based on variable data, and the overlapping areas for each model indicate a stronger likelihood of invasion. Chen P et al. (2007) used their 10 best models to predict the suitable habit range for Asian carp in North America. The results of this investigation indicate a broad habitat range within the continental United States and well into southern Canada including Manitoba. These ecological niche models provide further evidence that IAC have a strong potential to invade our waterways and pose a high likelihood of developing reproducing populations in Manitoba. Below are the predicted ranges of Grass and Bighead carp species, based on extensive ecological niche modelling conducted by DFO.

Figure 6: Predicted range of Grass carp in North America. NOTE: Silver and Black carp could occupy a similar range, based on their native air temperature requirements.


Figure 7: Potential range of Bighead carp in North America.

The maps (see Figures 6 & 7) were peer-reviewed and published in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences in 2007, and represent application of rigorous scientific methods to come up with an assessment of biological risk of Asian carp. Department of Fisheries and Oceans states: all Canadian rivers are at risk for invasion by Asian carp.

II. Future Predictions

Current climate change and anthropogenic eutrophication predictions indicate that aquatic conditions in Manitoba will become warmer and more eutrophic over time, improving the suitability for colonization of Asian carp in the province (Schindler et al., 2012). As determined by Cooke and Hill (2010) the most important environmental variables influencing metabolic activity and growth of Asian carp are planktonic food resources and water temperature. Currently nutrient loading – in particular nitrogen and phosphorus – from agricultural run-off, detergents, untreated or minimally treated waste water, and livestock waste products are contributing to the over fertilization of many water bodies. Over-fertilization of water bodies often leads to excessive algal growth and favurs nitrogen fixing blue-green algae, leading to dense cyanobacterial blooms, as demonstrated by the infamous phosphorus loading experiment on Lake 227 at the Experimental Lakes Area (Shindler et al., 2012). In many water bodies in our province, algal content or nutrient availability is the limiting factor for Asian carp developing reproducing populations. Furthermore, climate change models also predict increased precipitation which would lead to more extensive flooding events (Shindler et al., 2012). DeGrandChamp et al. (2006) found that flooding events increase dispersal rates of Asian carp, further increasing the likelihood of this AIS entering Manitoba.

Dense cyanobacterial blooms and changes to algal composition could also provide preferential conditions for Asian carp to outcompete native species. Experiments by Chen J et al. (2007) showed that Bighead carp are capable of not only surviving, but growing rapidly in dense cyanobacterial blooms in Lake Taihu, China. This creates an added potential for Asian carp to consume large amounts of cyanobacteria and accumulated various cyanotoxins in their tissue (Chen J et al., 2007). The cyanotoxins can be mobilized by the Asian carp, and can end up causing toxic effects if the carp is ingested by humans or other organisms, effectively creating a risk to the ecological system. Results from the experiment show


that Bighead carp are capable of concentrating microcystin in their muscle tissue, with elevated levels found during the months of July, October, and December (see Figure 8). Chen J et al. (2007) calculated that if a 60kg carp adult were to consume 300g of muscle tissue over the study period, the concentrations would equate to 0.375 µg/kg, 0.043 µg/kg, and 0.123 µg/kg of body weight for the months of July, October, and December, respectively (Chen J et al., 2007). The WHO guideline for tolerable daily intake is 0.04 µg/kg of body weight, thus these three months – or 25 percent of the samples – would be classified as unsafe levels for human consumption. This study provides evidence that Asian carp can bio-concentrate cyanotoxins in their tissue at levels dangerous to human health, and would be able to thrive in conditions that many other aquatic organisms would struggle in.

Figure 8: Microcystin (MC) concentrations in dry weight (DW) measured in various tissues of Bighead carp throughout 12 months from 2004 to 2005.

Based on the current conditions in Lake Winnipeg and the Interlake region, current drainage patterns surrounding Manitoba, and future anthropogenic climate change and eutrophication predictions, a qualitative map was constructed to demonstrate the relative risks of Asian carp colonizing waters in Manitoba (see Figure 10). Sub-drainage basins were used to delineate boundaries for risk assessment (see Figure 9), and from these boundaries, conclusions can be made that the Lake Winnipeg Drainage Basin is at the highest risk for Asian carp colonization, which is only predicted to increase with climate change.


Figure 9: Major Sub-Drainage Basins of Manitoba.Figure 10: Results of general risk assessment for Asian Carp invasion to Manitoba.

An important and rapidly expanding tool for predicting suitability of environments for invasive species is using remote sensing to quantify various environmental parameters such as algal biomass over time. Dr. Greg McCollough is currently working with an earth observations research consultant company called Noetix, looking to provide geo-referenced satellite images in conjunction with algorithms that quantify environmental variables such as chlorophyll α content and total suspended solids. Integrating this data into Ecological Niche Models similar to the ones created by Chen P et al. (2007), represents a cost-effective and efficient means for estimating suitability of conditions for AIS and making accurate predictions. The following series of images illustrates how remotely sensed images can be used for predicting water quality parameters (Neotix, 2012).

Figure 11: Remotely-sensed GIF image of Manitoba’s lakes.


Figures 12 & 13: Total Suspended Solids and Algal bloom detection, respectively, calculated from GIF image.

The degree to which an invasive species can colonize new habitat strongly influences the amount of ecological damage it can cause, and is determined by the mobility of that species. A study by DeGrandChamp et al. (2006) examined the mobility, movement rates, and preferential habitat selection of Silver and Bighead carp. In order to assess these parameters, the researchers captured a total of 50 Silver and 50 Bighead carp, surgically implanted ultrasonic transmitters in each of the species, and tracked their movements over a two-year period (DeGrandChamp et al., 2008). The results (see Table 5) indicate that both Silver and Bighead carp are capable of high daily movement rates – up to 64km per day – and can occupy a wide range of habitat – up to 411 and 462 km, respectively. The implications of these results are that both Silver and Bighead carp would be capable of travelling great distances and occupying large stretches of habitat, amplifying the potential ecological damage that these species could cause and increasing their likelihood of migrating to Manitoba.

Table 5: Results for the movement rates and maximum range for bighead and silver carp, tracked by mobile (M) and stationary (S) receivers (DeGrandChamp et al., 2008).

The effects of an Asian carp species on – the widely established – Common carp were examined in a study by Kadir et al., which looked at the net loss in the growth rate, total biomass, and survival rate of the species in the same habitat. The purpose of this study was to assess the changes to the ecological structure of an aquaculture pond as a result of the introduction of Silver carp; the pond was stocked with


larger carp varieties, including Common carp. There was a statistically significant variation in algal biomass (decreased) and decomposition (increased) as a result of introducing Silver carp to the experimental ponds (Kadir et al., 2006). This had direct consequences for other species in terms of growth rates, total biomass, and yield potential. Some species were not strongly affected by the presence or absence of Silver carp – particularly Common carp. Common carp are bottom dwelling omnivores that feed on benthic plants, insects, crawfish, worms and zoobenthos, while Silver carp are filter-feeders that prey heavily on phytoplankton in the upper layer of the water column (Kadir et al., 2006). As there is no significant dietary overlap with Common carp (see Fig 14), and with increased rates of decomposition from the Silver carp feeding, nutrient availability increased in the bottom layer of the water column, benefitting Common carp. This synergistic relationship between the two species – Common carp being firmly established within the province – would further aid in the abundance of carp in Manitoba, while effectively reducing resource availability throughout the water column for native organisms and habitat (see Fig 14).

Figure 14: Ecological Structure of experimental ponds with (a) and without (b) Silver Carp. The size of arrow indicates direction and rate of flow of nutrients/energy, and size of depicted organisms indicates average biomass.

These results support the notion that the introduction of Asian carp would be detrimental to ecologically important native species in Manitoba, particularly planktivorous feeders such as minnows and suckers, which are in turn food for larger commercially important fish such as lake trout, sauger and walleye (Environment Canada, 2011). Furthermore, a more ecologically-detrimental situation would arise in situations where Silver carp invaded regions already populated by Common carp, such as Lake Manitoba and its Delta Marsh.

5. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MANITOBA

I. Pathways of Introduction to Manitoba

There are two channels of dispersion for aquatic invasive species like the Asian carp: uncontrollable pathways, which are the introduction of Asian carp to a new water body by means of connected waterways or ecological disturbances such as flooding; and controllable pathways, which are the intentional introduction to a new water body by means of human-mediated transport. This vectored transportation places humans as the unnatural vessel for the AIS to invade an environment. Both channels of introduction must be considered when dealing with the potential risk of intrusion: it is important to be familiar with the water bodies Asian carp currently occupy, and where (in relation to Manitoba’s water bodies) they occur, as well as understand human motives and means of transporting invasive species.


The Mississippi River’s headwaters are located in North-Central Minnesota. These headwaters occur south of the Northern Continental Divide, which separates water from flowing southward into the States or northward into Canada, right up to Hudson’s Bay and the Arctic Ocean – passing through Manitoba’s network of watersheds (Gonzalez, 2002). Branching off the Mississippi River is the Missouri River, which winds into South Dakota and branches off again into the James River, which resides in North Dakota. Asian carp, specifically Silver and Grass carp have invaded both the Missouri and James River and are now present in central North Dakota (Smith, 2011). The Red River, which runs northward from South Dakota and drains into Lake Winnipeg, also runs adjacent to the James and Missouri river. However there is little risk for Asian carp invading the Red River from either the James River or the Mississippi River, as the distinct river systems have no connecting channels and are vastly separated.

The primary area of concern for Canada is the uncontrollable Great Lakes pathway. If a reproducing population of Asian carp successfully invades the Great Lakes, they have the potential to naturally flow westward from Lake Superior through Rainy River into Lake of the Woods, then enter the Winnipeg River system and inevitably arrive at Lake Winnipeg. Although the risk of this scenario unfolding is currently highly improbable, as Asian carp have yet to establish in the Great Lakes, it is of future concern.

The primary pathway of concern for Manitoba concerns the Saskatchewan River. Grass carp have been stocked in Alberta within an aquaculture facility where they were then intentionally introduced as means of vegetation control in Saskatchewan. There is potential for past escaped carp – believed to be 90 percent sterile – to enter the Saskatchewan River, which naturally flows into Lake Winnipeg (Cudmore and Mandrak, 2004). Risk of invasion by water channels is present, but current actions and dollars are working to prevent species of Silver and Bighead carp from entering the Great Lakes, while Grass carp have yet to be (reportedly) found in the Saskatchewan River.

The controllable pathway that doesn’t concern watersheds or drainage basins is human-induced transport. Human transport of AIS has always been the focus area of invasive species prevention management. The illegal transport of Asian carp across international borders is a problem: in 2012 alone, there have been five reported cases of attempts to illegally smuggle Asian carp into Windsor, Canada. In the latest case a shipment of 14,000 pounds of Asian carp was confiscated at the border (Anderson, 2012). Many different motives for transporting Asian carp into Canada from the States have been identified including the live fish trade at food markets and religious practices. There have been serious incidents in the past, and will continue to be serious risk of human transporting Asian carp into Manitoba in the future.

II. Sustainable Water Management

There are three types of management method categories, based on the scope of invasion: remediation, mitigation and prevention. A remediation approach is applied when the area of concern has been occupied and overrun by a population of invasive species that is established by way of scale or duration. The techniques conducted could include the introduction of larger species to the water body to try and out-compete the AIS, technical management techniques such as the addition of biochemical viruses specifically targeting the species, or more drastic measure such as completely draining the water body. Mitigation management occurs when an invasive species has entered a water body, with effects but no apparent reproducing population, and efforts have been put forth to control the invading species and mediate potential adverse effects. Observed techniques include: promoting increased fishing by increasing limits and making legislative changes in fisheries regulations, introduction of mass catches through electro-fishing and netting, or attempting to confine the AIS within an infected water body. Finally, the most important – and most relevant management method for Manitoba – is prevention. Prevention management occurs when there is a threat of AIS intrusion, but it has yet to be successfully introduced. Techniques utilized for prevention are focused on: public education, awareness and marketing; establishment of defence-minded legislation; and the introduction of enforcement or fines with AIS.


To date, there has been no known presence of Asian carp in Manitoba; however, the province possesses a thriving population of Common carp. Therefore the focus for Manitoba involves prevention-oriented management, as well as incorporation of some aspects of the mitigation approach in an attempt to control present Common carp populations and strengthen Manitoba’s aquatic ecosystems. Manitoba is only host to 15 known AIS – this compared to the 150 known aquatic invasive species in the Mississippi River basin means that the people of Manitoba have not been exposed to invasive species education like many in the States (Manitoba Conservation & Water Stewardship, 2012). Educating the public on invasive AIS and their potential introductions through connected waterways and/or human transport is the first line of defence in preventing their intrusion. Once public outreach is established, the public will then become the eyes and ears of the management plan as a type of participatory vigilante: reporting any sightings or encounters with aquatic invasive species.

The state of Wisconsin established an invasive species awareness month where students and citizens alike are honoured for any work done on promoting and aiding prevention of invasive species throughout the state (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2012). The Fisheries Branch of Manitoba Conservation & Water Stewardship, under the provincial government, has an established hotline number devoted entirely to AIS information, sightings and questions. The Manitoba hotline number is promoted through public outreach that the Fisheries Branch already undertakes via presentations at local events such as at the Forks and in Grand Beach, on Lake Winnipeg (Parks, 2012). An improvement to the educational method would be to introduce the AIS topic into secondary, and post secondary curriculum, as well as have the fisheries branch expand their public outreach to a more fishing oriented market like that in the Whiteshell.

Alongside the educated public, enforcement is crucial to ensure Asian carp are not intentionally and illegally transported into the province by humans. Enforcement regarding AIS refers to the provincial government’s cooperative work with the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) to set up a knowledgeable line of defence at all international border entries across Manitoba (Shead, 2012). The CBSA border guards could be further trained on Asian carp identification as well as the acquisition of technological scanning systems currently being utilized at larger crossings in Ontario (Anderson, 2012). In addition to the border guards’ enforcement efforts, provincial AIS Watercraft Inspectors will be in position – preferably with decontamination units – to ensure and enforce proper boat washing methods. This position is the first of its kind in Canada and is currently held as a summer term position for two university students through the Fisheries Branch. If improved funding for the AIS program was given, an increase in inspector positions would be instrumental in providing Manitoba with a stronger front line of defence. This, coupled with a strategy for public AIS awareness in the province, would further prevent controlled introduction of the Asian carp species – before they would occur naturally.

Monitoring is another large part of Manitoba’s AIS program. Continual monitoring on invasive species like Spiny water flea in Lake Winnipeg and Zebra mussels in the Red River, already takes place and is important in providing species dispersal information while as acting as a primary detection system for intrusion (Parks, 2012). In managing for invasion of Asian carp, identifying all major pathways of concern would be followed by the establishment of monitoring stations at these locations. Stations would crucial in preventing, spotting and verifying Asian carp invasion. The stations would also help in providing nutrient, temperature, and habitat information to assess when the particular waterway is approaching to that which Asian carp thrive.

“Assessing and managing the impacts of carp cannot be considered in isolation from other water management issues. Carp management is just one of many factors which influence water quality and aquatic biodiversity” (Koehn et al., 2000). The potential sustainable management techniques that can be introduced to mitigate the present Common carp populations in Manitoba can also be used as a pro-active method to make Manitoba’s water bodies less suitable for potential Asian carp invasions. The primary


recommendation for the management of Asian carp would be to rehabilitate and enhance the current aquatic environments in Manitoba, ensuring that all native species are thriving in their habitat of improved water qualities and aquatic biodiversities. As stated by Koehn et al., the strongest defence to AIS is a healthy ecosystem: the more productive and successful the native fish populations are, the more difficult it will be for an invasive species to intrude and survive. This form of precautionary management would focus on the disturbances that deteriorate aquatic habitats, such as increased nutrients from anthropogenic sources, channel and riverbank alterations, and sedimentation. The largest disturbance, which is extremely relevant and common to Manitoba, is hydroelectric production or: “river flow alteration caused by dams and weirs and diversion of water from rivers, which has impeded the spawning, recruitment and migration of native fish and created habitats in which carp survive well” (Koehn et al., 2000). In the province, Manitoba Hydro has vastly altered Manitoba’s aquatic landscape and has inadvertently resulted in stable dam habitats, which are favoured by the invasive Asian carp species.

In order to combat these aquatic disturbances, sustainable management for Asian carp and other AIS would involve action plans aimed at monitoring freshwater ecosystem disturbances throughout the province and properly address any disturbances found. The modification of aquatic environments proves greater results then traditional control attempts of eradicating adult carp when introduced. Population dynamics of Asian carp are density dependent, with juveniles replacing any removed adults, which contribute to increased cost and effort in employed and traditional U.S. methods (Koehn et al., 2000).

Ultimately, the most effective management method proposed to manage the potential threat of an Asian carp invasion would be the combination of mitigation and prevention techniques. Mitigation measures can already be established utilizing the present Common carp populations in Manitoba: these measures would include monitoring Manitoba’s aquatic ecosystems for natural and unnatural disturbances as well as rehabilitate existing habitats to promote thriving native populations. However, if Asian carp are successful in invading Manitoba’s waters they are here to stay; the greatest defence against all AIS is prevention (Shead, 2012). So management efforts towards Asian carp would include increased education, public outreach and marketing, as well as increased enforcement to minimize the potential of species’ introduction through human transport. Overall, Manitoba’s sustainable management plan is to establish a firm front line of an educated public, trained border guards, provincial inspectors with routine monitoring programs, as well as a strong interior of healthy aquatic ecosystems thriving with native fish populations.


References

Anderson, Tim. 2012. Authorities report five cases of individuals caught trying to bring live Asian carp across U.S.-Canada border. The Council of State Governments. Retrieved December 1, 2012

Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee. Asian Carp Control: Background and Threat. Asian Carp Regional Coordinating Committee. Retrieved from: <http://www.asiancarp.org/background.asp>

Bill Status of HB5317. 2012. Illinois General Assembly. Retrieved from: <http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=5317&GAID=11&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=65507&SessionID=84>

Binding C.E., Greenberg T.A. & Bukata R.P. 2011. Time series analysis of algal blooms in Lake of the Woods using the MERIS maximum chlorophyll index. Journal of Plankton Research, 33: 1847-1852

Canadian Council of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministers Aquatic Invasive Species Task Group. 2004. A Canadian Action Plan to Address the Threat of Aquatic Invasive Species. Retrieved from: <http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/enviro/ais-eae/plan/plan-eng.pdf>

Central Office. 2012. Invasive Species Month Honors Given. Wisconsin Department of NaturalResources. Published June 12, 2012

Chen J, Xie P, Zwang D, Lei H. 2007. In situ studies on the distribution patterns and dynamics of microcystins in a biomanipulation fish, bighead carp Aristichthys nobilis. Environmental Pollution, 147: 150-157.

Chen P, Wiley EO, Menyset KM. 2007. Ecological niche modeling as a predictive tool: silver and bighead carps in North America. Biological Invasions, 9: 43-51.

Chung, E. 2012. New Steps to Stop the Asian Carp Invasion: U.S Announces New Measures to Keep Invader from Entering Great Lakes. CBC News. Retrieved from: <http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2010/08/04/f-asian-carp-invasive-species.html>

Cooke S. L. & Hill W. R. 2010. Can filter-feeding Asian carp invade the Laurentian Great Lakes? A bioenergetic modelling exercise. Freshwater Biology, 55: 2138-2152.

Cudmore, B., and N.E. Mandrak. 2004. Biological synopsis of grass carp (Ctenopharyngodo idella). Can. MS Rpt. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2705: v + 44p

DeGrandchamp K., Garvey J. & Colombo R. 2008. Movement and Habitat Selection by Invasive Asian Carps in a Large River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 137: 45-56.

Environment Canada, Manitoba Water Stewardship. 2011. State of Lake Winnipeg Report. 29-109.

Flesher, J. 2012. Scientists Struggle to Measure Impact of Asian Carp Invasion. Winnipeg Free Press. Retrieved from: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/fpnewstopstory/scientists-struggle-to-measure-impact-of-asian-carp-invasion-162174455.html


Gabor T.S., Murkin H.R., Stainton M.P., Boughen J.A. & Titman R.D. 1989. Nutrient additions to wetlands in the Interlake region of Manitoba, Canada: effects of a single pulse addition in spring. Hydrobiologia, 279: 497-510.

Geyer, Allison. 2012. USGS wants to study ‘water gun’ for Asian carp. La Crosse Tribune.Published December 3, 2012.

Gonzalez, Mark A. 2002. Continental Divides in North Dakota and North America. NGDSNewsletter. North Dakota Geological Survey. Retrieved December 3, 2012.

Greco, Vanessa. 2012. Barrier Urged to Protect Great Lakes From Invasive Fish. CTV News.Published January 31, 2012

Gunderson, Jeff. 2008. A Craving for Crayfish: Minnesota Discovers a Louisiana Tradition. Fish Section. Minnesota Sea Grant.

Hamilton, K. (21st April 2010) Chicago Chef’s Asian Carp Solution: Call It “Shanghai Bass”. Riverfront Times. Retrieved from: <http://blogs.riverfronttimes.com/dailyrft/2010/04/chicago_chefs_calls_asian_carp.php> 30th November 2012.

Jonsson, P. (14th September 2012) Asian carp policy: Is it keeping Obama and Romney up at night? The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved from: <http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2012/0914/Asian-carp-policy-Is-it-keeping-Obama-and-Romney-up-at-night> 16th September 2012.

Kadir A, Kundu R.S., Milstein A., Wahab M.A.. 2006. Effects of silver carp and small indigenous species on pond ecology and carp polycultures in Bangladesh. Aquaculture, 261: 1065-1076.

Koehn, J., Brumley, A. and Gehrke, P. 2000. Managing the Impacts of Carp. Bureau of Rural Sciences. Department of Agriculture. Fisheries and Forestry - Australia. Canberra.

Lindell, Rebecca. 2012. Asian Carp Create a Warzone on The Water In Rural Illinois. Global News. Published October 26, 2012

Mandrak, N. E., Cudmore, B. 2004. Risk Assessment for Asian Carps in Canada. Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat. Retrieved from: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/csas/Csas/DocREC/2004/RES2004_103_E.pdf

Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship. 2012. Aquatic Invasive Species (AIS). Provincial Government Presentation.

Manitoba State of the Environment Reports. (1993). Government of Manitoba. Retrieved from <http://www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/annual-reports/soe-reports/soe93/fish.html> 29th October 2012.

Mann, Jay. 2012. Asian Carp Reduced to Pellet Size; Look, a Mola-Mola in the Backyard. The Fish Story. The SandPaper News. Published October 18, 2012

NatureServe. Invasive Species. Conservation Issues. Retrieved from: <http://www.natureserve.org/consIssues/invasivespecies.jsp> December 3, 2012


Neotix. Accessed 2012. Web. <http://www.noetix.ca/WaterQuality/ReviewEtude/Reviewetude.asp>

Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database. (2011) Ctenopharyngodon idella (grass carp). USGS, Gainesville, FL. Retrieved from <http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/FactSheet.aspx?speciesID=514> 22nd October 2012.

Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database. (2011) Cyprinus carpio (common carp). USGS, Gainesville, FL. Retrieved from <http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/factsheet.aspx?speciesID=4> 30th November 2012.

Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database. (2011) Hypophthalmichthys molitrix (silver carp). USGS, Gainesville, FL. Retrieved from <http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/FactSheet.aspx?speciesID=549> 22nd October 2012.

Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database. (2011) Hypophthalmichthys nobilis (bighead carp). USGS, Gainesville, FL. Retrieved from <http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/FactSheet.aspx?speciesID=551> 22nd October 2012.

Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database. (2011) Mylopharyngodon piceus (black carp). USGS, Gainesville, FL. Retrieved from <http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/FactSheet.aspx?speciesID=573> 22nd October 2012.

Ohlson, K. (25th May 2011) Making the Best of Invasive Species. Smithsonian.com. Retrieved from <http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Making-the-Best-of-Invasive-Species.html#ixzz2E92gKnnY> 16th September 2012.

Parks, Candace. 2012. Aquatic Invasive Species Specialists. Manitoba Conservation &Water Stewardship. Ecological Services Division. Fisheries Branch

Province of Manitoba. Accessed 2012. Manitoba Land Initiative. Web. <http://mli2.gov.mb.ca/>

Ralley, W. Aquatic Invasive Species in Manitoba: Concerns and Actions. Manitoba Water Stewardship. Retrieved from: <http://www.redriverbasincommission.org/Conference/25th_Proceedings/Wendy_Ralley. pdf>

Royal Botanical Gardens. Project Paradise. Retrieved from: <http://www.rbg.ca/Page.aspx?pid=312>

Royal Botanical Gardens. The Fishway. Retrieved from: <http://www.rbg.ca/Page.aspx?pid=331>

Shead, Justin. 2012. Water Quality Specialist. Manitoba Conservation and Water Stewardship. Water Quality Section

Shindler D.W., Hecky R.E. & McCollough G.K. 2012. The rapid eutrophication of Lake Winnipeg: Greening under global change. Journal of Great Lakes Research, 38: 6-13.

Shriver, Melissa. 2012. Clubs and Nets All Fair Game In ‘Redneck Fishing Derby’. KHQA News. Connect Tristates. Published May 7, 2012

Smith, Doug. 2011. Asian carp invasion continues, now in N.D. Sports. Star Tribune. Published October 11, 2011.


Stewart, S. 2002. Project Paradise: Restoring Biodiversity to Lake Ontario. Retrieved from: <http://www.rbg.ca/Document.Doc?id=38>

Sula, Mike. 2010. The Culinary Solution. News and Features. Chicago Reader. Published March 25, 2010

United States Department of Agriculture. 2012. Federal Laws and Regulations: Public Laws and Acts. Retrieved from: <http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov/laws/publiclaws.shtml>

United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010. Asian Carp Prevention and Control Act. Retrieved from: <http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ307/html/PLAW-111publ307.htm>

United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2008. Clean Boating Act of 2008. Retrieved from: <http://anstaskforce.gov/Meetings/2009_May/122STAT2650.pdf>

United States Government. 2000. Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990. Retrieved from: <http://www.anstaskforce.gov/Documents/nanpca90.pdf>

List of Figures Figure 1: Hypophthalmichthys nobilis. 2010. USGS. Retrieved from < http://www.fishing-headquarters.com/wp-

content/uploads/2012/10/bigheadcarpdist_usgs.jpg> 22nd October 2012.

Figure 2: Cyprinus carpio. 2011. USGS. Retrieved from <http://www.tsusinvasives.org/dotAsset/4ce170df-e783-4812-97b8-7889523ad132.png> 1st December 2012.

Figure 3: Retrieved from: <http://www.rbg.ca/Page.aspx?pid=331> 14th November 2012.

Figure 4: Environment Canada, 2011.

Figure 5: Gabor et al., 1989.

Figure 6: Retrieved from: <http://www.great-lakes.org/Wkly_news/graphics/12-07-09-B.jpg>

Figure 7: Retrieved from: <http://www.great-lakes.org/Wkly_news/graphics/12-07-09-C.jpg>

Figure 8: Chen J et al., 2007.

Figure 9: Daniel Seburn, with information from Manitoba Land Initiative – Government of Manitoba, 2012.

Figure 10: Manitoba Land Initiative – Government of Manitoba, 2012.

Figure 11: Neotix, 2012.

Figures 12 & 13: Neotix, 2012.

Figure 14: Kadir et al., 2006.

Acknowledgements


Thank you to the following professionals for assistance in acquiring information for this report, and for their continued work as it pertains to AIS: Dr. Gordon Goldsborough, Dr. Greg McCollough, Candace Parks & Justin Shead.
