Demographic analysis of trade-offs with deliberate fragmentation of streams: Control of invasive species versus protection of native species

Tools restricting the movements of invasive species (e.g. barriers) and reducing habitat fragmentation for native species (e.g. corridors, fishways) provide examples where actions taken to address one environmental concern can hinder efforts to address another environmental concern. We used perturbation analysis of stage-structured projection matrices to evaluate the efficacy of seasonally operated barriers and fishways for controlling non-native sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) in the Laurentian Great Lakes while minimizing effects on non-target fishes. For non-jumping fishes migrating in spring, seasonally operated barriers without a fishway will not balance the management objectives satisfactorily. Migration phenologies of the seven common non-target fishes considered in our analyses overlapped considerably with the migration phenology of sea lamprey, with peaks in migration typically being 7–43 days (median 12) from the peak in the sea lamprey migration. Consequently, across species, years, and tributaries, 44–100% of the migratory runs of non-target fishes would be blocked under the 75-day operation period required to block 99% of the sea lamprey spawning run, on average. Reductions in the production of non-target fishes due to blocking were also projected to be similar in magnitude to reductions projected in the production of sea lamprey, unless density-dependent compensation was strong or overlap in migration phenologies between a non-target species and sea lamprey was low. Even under density-dependent compensation, providing a fishway is advisable and passage of non-target fishes may have to be highly effective to avoid population declines in non-jumping species that migrate between a Great Lake and its tributaries.