Welcome Rotary Club! USGS Great Lakes Science Center Russ Strach - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Welcome Rotary Club! USGS Great Lakes Science Center Russ Strach Director June 7, 2017 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey

Great Lakes Science Are The Great Lakes Bigger Than You Think? Center SIZE COMPARISONS SIZE FACTS Chesapeake Bay holds 18 trillion Total area of lakes and gallons of w ater. The Great drainage basin = 295,000 sq mi. Lakes could fill Chesapeake Bay 333 times. Total w ater surface area = You could submerge the Empire 95,000 sq mi. State Building in Lake Superior. Total volume of w ater = 5,473 Spread evenly across the cubic mi or 6 quadrillion gallons continental U.S., the Great Lakes (6,000,000,000,000,000) of w ould submerge the country w ater. under about 9.5 feet of w ater. Total coastline = 10,900 mi. If the w ater in the Great Lakes w ere distributed evenly among The deepest part of the Great Earth’s population, everyone Lakes is in Lake Superior at a w ould get about a million gallons depth of 1,335 ft. of w ater. DID YOU KNOW? 1 out of every 10 DID YOU KNOW? Americans live in the The Great Lakes hold 95% Great Lakes Basin. That’s of the United States fresh 25 million people! surface w ater! The drainage basin (green) of the Great Lakes (blue) centered on Washington DC If Each Lake Were A State By Land Area Ontario = New Jersey Superior = Maine Michigan and Huron each = West Virginia Erie = Maryland Contact Information: David Bennion, Jeffrey Schaeffer, Sandra Morrison USGS Great Lakes Science Center Ann Arbor, MI 734-994-3331, www.glsc.usgs.gov

Great Lakes Science Center

GLSC by the numbers: 30 research scientists across 1,000 miles 125+ research projects 100+ papers/yr. dozens of collaborative efforts and partnerships

GLSC Base Science Funding 10 9 8 Funding ($ Millions) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 $8.4M $8.6M

USGS Regions Southeast Business Northeast & regional Midwest GLSC science Alaska collaboration Northwest Pacific

USGS Mission Areas Climate and land use change Core science systems Science funding Ecosystems GLSC & Energy and minerals national Environmental health priorities Natural hazards Water

Brief History 1940 1957 1970 Bureau of Sportfish & Wildlife Bureau of Commercial Fisheries “. . . except the Great Lakes . . .” 1970 Nixon Executive Order, Reorganization Plan No. 4

Fisheries Science Great Lakes Science Center Magnuson–Stevens Great Lakes Fishery Fishery Conservation Research Authorization & Management Act Act lf 2016 Authority Authority Funding Funding Introduced Feb 2016 Supported by many partners

2. What is driving GLSC science?

DOI legal obligations Oversees development of 23% of US energy supplies Largest supplier and manager of water in the 17 western states Maintains relationships with 566 federally recognized tribes Provides services to > 1.7 million American Indian and Alaska Native people Manages 1/5 of all US land Laws : Endangered Species A., Migratory Birds A., National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement A., etc. USGS is their science branch

OMB’s recurring questions: Why is this federal science ? vs state, academic . . . If it is federal science, why USGS ? vs EPA, NOAA . . . If USGS, why GLSC ? What is Federal science? . . .

A. “Era without earmarks” 2010-11 USGS Mission Area Science Strategies 2012 Congressional earmarks eliminated Substantial shift in budget influence to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Funding (“fiscal efficiency”) OMB Controls: National science strategy

Management Science “The science branch of the DOI”

Implications: Local/regional applications with national significance Science for management (not “discovery”) Cross-disciplinary and collaborative (“efficiency”) Phragmites, HABs, Mussels Collaboratives; Coll. Impact * “Trust resources” Species, tribes, lands

Hitting the Sweet Spot Engage Federal Authorities/ here Responsibilities

2. What is GLSC doing?

Papers by Re Resear earch F Foc ocus s by decade 100% 90% 80% Percent of publications 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 life history stock assessment invasives ecosystem modeling From Schaeffer, Vinson, Hansen presentation to MWFW Conference 2016

Papers by Phy Phylum by decade 100% 90% 80% 70% Percent of publications 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 fish benthic invertebrate plant bacteria zooplankton fish, benthic invertebrate From Schaeffer, Vinson, Hansen presentation to MWFW Conference 2016

A. Fisheries (60-70 % of budget)

MOU Lake Committee process Monitor and assess Lake Michigan prey fish Prey fish, lake trout recovery, sea lamprey status Understand the food web Top-down vs bottom-up

Lake Committee Process Council of Lake Committees Limits on Natural Res. Cooperation Harvest MOU Managers: States Stock Provinces Data & Sport Fish Tribes Interpretation

GLSC research vessel fleet R/V Kiyi R/V Muskie Lake Superior Lake Erie R/V Sturgeon R/V Kaho Lake Mich-Hur Lake Ontario Small vessels R/V Arcticus Lake Mich-Hur

Fishery Coregonid restoration Energy transfer Cisco Artedi

Historical occurrences (Muir et al. in prep) nigripinnis X X (blackfin) johannae X X (deepwater) zenithicus X X X X (shortjaw) reighardi X X X (shortnose) kiyi X X X X hoyi *** X X X X (bloater) artedi X X X X X (cisco)

Contemporary occurrences (Muir et al. in prep) nigripinnis (blackfin) johannae Extinct (deepwater) zenithicus X X (shortjaw) reighardi Extinct (shortnose) kiyi X hoyi *** X X X X* (bloater) artedi X X X X X (cisco)

Coregonid restoration Rearing & stocking techniques Two experimental fish rearing labs Ann Arbor, MI Cortland, NY Jim Johnson, Solomon David

Coregonid restoration Cisco ( coregonus artedi ) Life history, recruitment dynamics and habitat requirements (Mark Vinson, Dan Yule, Brian Lantry) Larval cisco

Coregonid restoration Cisco ( coregonus artedi ) Genetics and morphology (Wendy Stott, Dan Yule) GLSC Coregonid Database

Acoustic Telemetry Sea lamprey Lake sturgeon Lake trout National Animal Telemetry Network via Integrated Ocean Observing System

Sea lamprey control technology Selective fish passage in GL streams Pacific lamprey Sea lamprey attractants/repellants DC current guidance Acoustic walls Pheromones Restoration of native species American eel 3kPZS Nick Johnson, Chris Holbrook, Scott Miehls

Alarm cue: risk information Predation • Migrants are being killed upstream. Larval Mortality • Poor habitat for deposition of offspring. • Over-winter mortality? Post-spawning Mortality • Low mate availability.

Lake trout restoration Life history of morphs Spawning habitat

Phragmites Integrated Pest Management 2. Forecast 1. Map 3. Control 4. Coordinate Vulnerability Gene Silencing Microbial symbiosis Collaborative for Microbial Symbiosis Kurt Kowalski

Asian carp: tracking the invasion front How old is it? Was it born here? Patrick Kocovsky

Remove various boney structures Annuli easily identified

A. Fisheries B. Invasive species C. Restoration ecology

Pollinators Monarch butterfly Karner blue butterfly Native bees Monitoring plan Habitat and phenology Inventory Ralph Grundel

Status Threats Pitcher’s thistle Dune ecology Noel Pavlovic

Oak savanna Management approaches Impact on species Noel Pavlovic Image: Steepcone, wikimedia commons (link)

Bennion and Manny, 2011 Restored spawning reefs Reef siting Pre/post monitoring Detroit River Habitat destruction to 2003 Proposed site for reef restoration Reef construction

Western rn Lak ake Er Erie R Restor orati tion Asse n Assessm ssment nt WLER WLERA Justin Saarinen Kurt Kowalski Ryan Keeling Example Where should I plan a restoration project? Coastal wetland Here? Or there? restoration tool It depends on these. Sorry. This tool is not presently online, but will be soon.

A. Fisheries B. Invasive species C. Restoration ecology D. Advanced Technology

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) Ground-truth remotely sensed data Autonomous gliders USGS Advanced Tech program

And much more . . . Thank you