AFS Standard Methods for Sampling & Comparing Your

Data With North American Standards

Fisheries Management Section

of the American Fisheries Society

Scott A. Bonar

USGS Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University

of Arizona, Tucson

sbonar@ag.arizona.edu

Wayne A. Hubert

USGS Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit,

University of Wyoming

David W. Willis

South Dakota State University (Deceased)

Toby Torrey and Matt Rahr

Web Development Group, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences,

University of Arizona

Norman Mercado Silva

Departamento de Sistemática y Ecología Acuática, El Colegio de la

Frontera Sur – Unidad Chetumal, Quintana Roo, Mexico

And Many Others!!!

Education Section

Computer User’s Section

Sponsors:

Standardization: Collect data using the

same gear types fished in the same

manner in different waterbodies or in the

same waterbody over time.

Why Standardize?

Standardization has been responsible for great human progress

345

315

321 345

335

Standardization of methods reduces variability in data due to

gear bias – allows comparison among water bodies and over

time

In fish studies:

Fewer gears (with

standardization) means

easier to validate under a

wide range of conditions.

Using well-accepted standard methods lends additional

credibility to your study

e.g., litigation, publishing results

Metadata is much easier

to record and compare

when data is standardized

Standardization of methods means better

communication

Membership trends for International Society of Limnology (SIL); Ecological Society of America

(ESA); American Society of Limnology and Oceanography (ASLO); North American Benthological

Society (NABS); Australian Society of Limnology. (ASL) from Likens (2004)

Threats to aquatic life are increasingly global

Allows

biologists to

focus on

biology and

not method

development

Standardization has always been previously

responsible for great advances in fisheries science

Freshwater Fish Standard Sampling

Protocols

• Examples include local,

state, regional (PNW

salmonids), national (US

EPA EMAP)

• Over 65 developed across

US and Canada alone

Can we get a set

of protocols for

North America?

-That incorporate the best of

all these previous methods?

In North America, Fish Communities are Often

Categorized into Two Groups for Management

Warmwater (incl. coolwater)

Species Coldwater

Can American Fisheries Society

develop a set of standard protocols

for North America for...

Warmwater Coldwater

Ponds (<200 ha)

Lakes (>200 ha)

Wadable Streams

Rivers

Two-story

… general fish surveys in each of nine

major waterbody types

Fisheries Management Section

of the American Fisheries Society

• In the 1980s and 1990s- Move toward

standard sampling: FMS Fisheries

Techniques Standardization Committee

• At the 2004 National AFS Meeting, FMS

voted unanimously to support development of

a book on standard inland fish sampling

methods

Approach

• Recognize

standardizing

sampling methods

is more of a social

science problem

than a biological

science problem.

• “A must-read for the conservation professional”

- Ecology

• “A guidepost…should be a part of college curricula in every natural resources program”

– Mamie Parker, Assistant Director, USFWS

• “Reassuring, wise and entertaining guidance”

– Paul R. Ehrlich, Stanford University Author of “The Population Bomb”

Therefore AFS Standard Sampling

Committee Combined Social Science

and Biological Science Techniques to

Develop AFS Standard Methods

• Most common, accepted sampling methods recommended.

• Top experts asked to author book chapters.

• A considerable number of biologists and managers contributed.

• Experts contributing represented as wide a range as possible (People similar to users, e.g. state and academics etc.)

• Most agencies in US, Canada, Mexico provided input, many provided funding.

• Methods not forced on people. However, they lose their ability to compare if don’t use.

In Fall, 2009 – Publication of AFS Standard

Methods for Sampling North American

Freshwater Fishes

Available at: www.fisheries.org in

books section

284 Biologists from 107 agencies or organizations

were involved in method development

…with contributions from 10 different agencies and

organizations

Fisheries Management Section

of the American Fisheries Society

Education Section

Computer User’s Section

So what is provided in the book?

Available at: www.fisheries.org in

books section

Characteristic Standard

Boat Metal, 4-6 m long, 1.5-2.0 m wide

Power generator Single-phase or three-phase able to produce 230 V and 5 kW or higher

Control unit

(electrofisher)

Capable of 60 Hz pulsed DC output, high voltage, and include an amperage and voltage meter or dial rheostat

Anodes Two, suspended from booms extending forward 2.4-2.5 m from the bow; distance between foremost ends of the booms is

1.9-2.0 m; the anode array hangs from the end of the boom and is made up of six droppers equally spaced in a circle; each

dropper consists of a stainless steel cable 4.75 mm diameter and long enough to submerge 0.6-0.9 m below the water

surface

Cathode Hull of metal boat

Disconnect

(safety switch)

A foot-activated disconnect in the bow to control field activation; additional disconnects may be placed in the bow and near

the control unit

Power output 2,500-3,500 W @ 115 μS/cm ambient water conductivity (see Table 14.1 for requirements at other conductivities)

Frequency 60 Hz pulsed DC

Boat operation Operate boat at 1-3 km/h along shallow (<3 m) nearshore areas; forward progress may require meandering to parallel the

shore and to avoid obstacles, and sporadic backing up to retrieve fish and exit pockets along shore

Field activation Field activation is managed by the netter; the field is continuously activated during forward progress; deactivate to avoid

potential hazards, when backing up, or when at a standstill netting immobilized fish

Dip nets 0.6 cm mesh, 30 cm deep, and 2.4-3.0 m fiberglass handle

Netters Two; one when catch rates are low

Livewell Suitable livewell positioned behind the bow within reach of the netter(s); water is aerated to maintain high levels of oxygen

and agitated to release carbon dioxide, or at a minimum exchanged frequently

Processing fish Process fish at end of sample or stop sample to lighten an overcrowded livewell; process large fish first

Sample sites Selected randomly without replacement; number of sites dictated by desired precision and confidence, and by the random

sampling design

Effort Recorded in seconds as indicated by the control unit’s built-in timer; reported in hours

Timing Daytime; nighttime if water clarity is high (e.g., Secchi visibility > 1 m); spring when water temperatures range 13-21˚C;

avoid sampling when waters are rough or uncharacteristically turbid

Recommendations for sampling: Example NA Boat Electrofishing Standards (WW Lakes and Ponds/Rivers)

Statistics and Data Management

Related to Standard Sampling

Complements Interpretation of Freshwater Fisheries Data, M. Brown and C. Guy, eds.

Discusses basics, including sample size determination for indices, bias, calculation of indices, trend analysis, how to set up a database etc.

Authors: Michael Quist, Kim Bonvechio and Micheal Allen

Methods to prevent spread of

invasive species while sampling

Authors: Stewart Jacks, Steve Sharon,

Ronald Kinnunen, David Britton, Doug

Jensen, and Scott Smith

Decontaminant Concentration Minimum Contact

Time

Iodized salt solution Saturated 30 minutes

Ethanol 50% 2 minutes or

multiple flooding

rinses

Lysol® or other

phenol-based

product

As sold 2 minutes or

multiple flooding

rinses

Chlorine bleach 10% 1 hour

Grapefruit seed

extract solution

2 tablespoons per

gallon

5 minutes

Table 1. Control measures for zebra mussels, other invertebrates (excluding New

Zealand mud snails), vertebrate eggs, and plants including algae (OWRB 2005).

Example of Control Measures Reported in Invasive Species Chapter

Methods to convert data to

compare to standard data

Paired-Sample Regression/Correlation Methods

Authors: James T. Peterson and Craig P. Paukert

Provide access to comparison data

Authors: Mark Brouder, Alison Iles, and Scott Bonar

What is happening now with the AFS

Standard Methods?

Methods being

adopted around

North America

However, one barrier:

What can we do with

long term data sets

collected using

different methods?

Options

• You might already being

using AFS standard

sampling.

• Consider retaining long-

term sampling methods in

specific waters and

standardizing with AFS in

other waters.

• Convert data to AFS

standards using Peterson

and Paukert methods or

other techniques.

• Switch to AFS standards

depending on situation.

There are different levels of

standardization – any move toward

standardization is an improvement

No Standarization Complete Standardization

Ease of DataComparison

Variability in Data Dueto Sampling TechniqueDifferences

Ongoing work now in at least 8

states and provinces in method

validation and calibration

Lead Programmers:

Toby Torrey and Matt Rahr – UA

Educational Communications and

Technologies

Averil Cate – UA Advanced Resource

Technology Laboratory

Norman Mercado Silva and Scott

Bonar – USGS AZ Cooperative Fish

and Wildlife Research Unit

Web-Based Standard Data Comparison Tool

Sponsors:

Kenneth Carlander’s Handbooks of Freshwater Fishery Biology 1969-1997

2006 National Fisheries

Data Summit (US)

Data sharing should start

small and show

accomplishments.

Prototype and pilot efforts

encouraged.

Lead Programmers:

Toby Torrey and Matt Rahr – UA

Educational Communications and

Technologies

Averil Cate – UA Advanced Resource

Technology Laboratory

Norman Mercado Silva and Scott

Bonar – USGS AZ Cooperative Fish

and Wildlife Research Unit

Web-Based Standard Data Comparison Tool

Sponsors:

www.fisheriesstandardsampling.org

Objectives of a Standard

Sampling Website/Database • For comparison of data collected using AFS

standard methods only.

• Compares results of individual water body

survey to continental/regional/state averages

and percentiles of CPUE, length-frequency,

condition and growth.

• Continually builds on itself – entered data

incorporated into summaries (Crowd Sourcing).

• Designed to be as simple as possible – no “bells

and whistles”

Objectives of Website/Database

(continued) • Option to connect to larger databases

containing standard and non-standard

data.

• Allows comments on the AFS standard

methods; explains the value of standard

methods; current validation/calibration

research on methods also discussed.

1) Choose water body and

standard survey type

2) Locate and click

on water body

3) Location, State/Province,

Country, Ecoregion, HUC,

Lat/Long fields automatically

populated

4) Upload Simple Data

File From Survey

5) Get Results – (Comparison of your

CPUE, Length Frequency, Condition and

Growth with Continent, Regional, and

State Summaries)

5) Get Results

(continued) – (Comparison of your CPUE, Length

Frequency, Condition and Growth with

Continent, Regional, and State

Summaries)

Specifics to

stream and

river

sampling

AFS Standardized Flowing Water Sampling Methods

(Discussed in detail in book)

Method Water Body Type Effort Reported in:

Boat Electrofisher Rivers Fish/hr. – and where possible

Fish/100 m2

Raft Electrofisher Rivers

Fish/hr. – and where possible

Fish/100 m2

Drifting Trammel Net Rivers Fish per 100 m drift

Bag Seine Rivers Fish per quarter seine haul

Small Hoop Net Rivers Fish per 24 hr set

Large Hoop Net Rivers Fish per 24 hr set

Buffalo Net Rivers Fish per 24 hr set

Small Mesh Benthic Trawl Rivers Fish/min

Large Mesh Benthic Trawl Rivers Fish/min

Backpack Electrofisher Wadable Streams Fish/100 m2

Tow Barge Electrofisher Wadable Streams Fish/100 m2

Stream Seine Wadable Streams Fish/Haul

Redd Counts Wadable Streams Redds/100 m2

Snorkeling Rivers and Wadable Streams Fish/100 m2

www.fisheriesstandardsampling.org

5) Get Results

(continued) – (Comparison of your CPUE, Length

Frequency, Condition and Growth with

Continent, Regional, and State

Summaries)

River and stream surveys loaded into

sampling webtool (as of 1/15)

Fish Type Water Body Type Number of

Surveys to

Date

Warmwater Fish Wadeable Streams 80

Warmwater Fish Rivers 180

Coldwater Fish Wadeable Streams 582

Coldwater Fish Rivers 100

TOTAL RECORDS 942

In Summary

• Standardization of methods has been

responsible for considerable human

progress in many fields including fisheries.

• Standardization at increasingly larger

scales will be important to meet the needs

of the future.

• Standardization has clear benefits to

individual managers and researchers.

Future Needs:

• Continue to educate potential users about

benefits of standardizing on a large scale

• Continue to improve tools to validate,

compare, and analyze standard data

• Fine tune process within AFS for moving

forward

International Standard Sampling Symposium at

2015 AFS Annual Meeting in Portland Oregon

• Plan to Attend! Contact any member of Planning

Committee for further questions: • Dr. Scott A. Bonar –Leader and Professor, USGS Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research

Unit (Past President Western Division AFS; Chair, AFS Fish Management Section Standard

Sampling Committee)

• Dr. Wayne A. Hubert – Professor Emeritus, Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of

Wyoming (Past President AFS)

• Dr. Norman Mercado Silva – Professor, Centro Universitario de la Costa Sur, Universidad de

Guadalajara, Mexico

• Dr. T. Douglas Beard, Jr., Chief, USGS National Climate Change & Wildlife Science Center,

Reston, VA

• Dr. Göran Dave, Professor, Department of Biology and Environmental Sciences, Göteborg

University, Göteborg, Sweden (Chair Swedish Standards Committee)

• Prof. Dr. Jan Kubečka, Professor, Hydrobiologický ústav (Institute of Hydrobiology) Biologické

centrum (Biology Centre) České Budějovice, Czech Republic

• Dr. Nigel Lester – Research Scientist, Aquatic Research and Development Section, Ontario

Ministry of Natural Resources

• Dr. Ian J Winfield - Lake Ecosystems Group, Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Lancaster

Environment Centre, U.K.; (Past President of the Fisheries Society of the British Isles)

• Dr. Brian Graeb – Department of Natural Resource Management, South Dakota State University

• Mr. Mark Porath, Nebraska Game and Parks Commission

284 Biologists from 107 agencies or organizations

were involved in method development

…with contributions from 10 different agencies and

organizations

Fisheries Management Section

of the American Fisheries Society

Education Section

Computer User’s Section