Conservation and Ecology of Marine Forage Fishes—

Proceedings of a Research Symposium, September 2012

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Open-File Report 2013–1035
Cover: 

Upper Left: Herring spawn, BC coast – Milton Love, “Certainly More Than You Want to Know About the Fishes of the Pacific Coast,” reproduced with permission. 

Left Center: Tufted Puffin and sand lance (Smith Island, Puget Sound) – Joseph Gaydos, SeaDoc Society. 

Right Center: Symposium attendants – Tami Pokorny, Jefferson County Water Resources.

Upper Right: Buried sand lance – Milton Love, “Certainly More Than You Want to Know About the Fishes of the Pacific Coast,” reproduced with permission. 

Background: Pacific sardine, CA coast – Milton Love, “Certainly More Than You Want to Know About the Fishes of the Pacific Coast,” reproduced with permission.
Conservation and Ecology of Marine Forage Fishes—

Proceedings of a Research Symposium, September 2012

Edited by

Theresa Liedtke, U.S. Geological Survey;

Caroline Gibson, Northwest Straits Commission;

Dayv Lowry, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife; and

Duane Fagergren, Puget Sound Partnership

Open-File Report 2013–1035

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2013

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth,

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit 

http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications,

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Suggested citation:

Liedtke, Theresa, Gibson, Caroline, Lowry, Dayv, and Fagergren, Duane, eds., 2013, 

Conservation and Ecology of Marine Forage Fishes—Proceedings of a Research Symposium, 

September 2012: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2013-1035, 24 p.

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain

copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be 

secured from the copyright owner.
iii

Acknowledgments

The symposium organizing committee wishes to thank the many science and policy experts who

contributed to the success of the symposium through presentation of their work, ideas, and thoughtful 

participation in discussions. This event would not have been possible without the leadership and support 

of the Northwest Straits Commission and sponsoring agencies. 

We thank Adam Summers, Laurie Spaulding, and Kristy Kull at the University of Washington 

Friday Harbor Laboratories for the great facility, food, and on-site logistics; as well as Andrea Hood 

(Northwest Straits Commission) and Shannon Davis (FRIENDS of the San Juans) for taking detailed notes 

that were the basis for this document.

Special thanks to Brie Van Cleve (FB Van Cleve & Associates) for outstanding facilitation and 

support throughout the symposium, and to Joseph Gaydos (SeaDoc Society) and Kit Rawson (Tulalip 

Tribes) for skillfully facilitating the science and policy work groups. 

Although this event was co-sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey, comments and written 

reports made by speakers not affiliated with the USGS do not represent the views or position of the USGS.

 
iv

This page left intentionally blank
v

Contents

Introduction and Background......................................................................................................................................... 1

Symposium Agenda....................................................................................................................................................... 2

Day 1: Thursday September 13 ................................................................................................................................. 2

Day 2: Friday September 14 ...................................................................................................................................... 3

Symposium Presentations............................................................................................................................................. 3

Presentation Abstracts............................................................................................................................................... 3

Forage Fish Management in Washington............................................................................................................... 3

Forage Fish Management in British Columbia, Canada ......................................................................................... 4

Herring and the Ecological Effects of Infectious and Parasitic Diseases................................................................ 5

Toxic Contaminants and Effects on Adult Herring and Eggs.................................................................................. 5

Landscape and Seasonal Patterns of Fishes and Jellyfish in Puget Sound Surface 

Waters—Preliminary Results.................................................................................................................................. 6

Temporal Variation of Pelagic Forage Fish Around San Juan Island ..................................................................... 6

Seabird Diets in the Salish Sea and Northern California Current ........................................................................... 7

KEYNOTE: Challenges and Opportunities in the Conservation and Management of Forage 

Fishes: Advancing Recommendations from the Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force.................................................. 8

An Iconoclastic View of Herring and Forage Fish in the Salish Sea—Match and Mismatch between 

Concern and Ecology ............................................................................................................................................. 8

Native Fish Communities and Habitat Coupling: Delivery of a Nearshore Energy Subsidy by an 

Offshore Planktivore............................................................................................................................................... 9

Potential Impacts of Depleting Forage Species in the California Current ............................................................... 9

Pacific sand Lance Burrowing/Morphology............................................................................................................10

Forage Fish Ecology and Management in the California Current with an Emphasis on Predator Needs ..............10

Management and Monitoring of Forage Fishes in Alaska......................................................................................11

Analyzing Management Strategies for Marine Forage Fishes...............................................................................11

Federal-State Policies and the Coastal Pelagic Species Fisheries Management Plan..........................................12

Pacific Forage Fish Campaign: Strengthening U.S. Federal Policy.......................................................................12

Poster Abstracts........................................................................................................................................................13

Juvenile Wild Chinook migrating and rearing in the San Juan Islands prefer herring but rely on sandlance.........13

Studies of Eulachon Smelt in Oregon and Washington.........................................................................................13

Did an Oil Spill Contribute to the Decline of Cherry Point Herring?.......................................................................14

Evidence for the Portfolio Effect in Pacific Herring in Puget Sound, Washington..................................................14

Investigations of Early Life History of Surf Smelt and Pacific Sand Lance in Puget Sound: Some 

Preliminary Findings and Planned Future Activities ..............................................................................................15

Quantitative Assessment of Surf Smelt and Pacific Sand Lance Spawn Deposition.............................................15

Historic Sampling Effort and Nearshore Distribution of Pacific Sand Lance (Ammodytes hexapterus) 

in the Salish Sea, Washington...............................................................................................................................16

Spatial and Temporal Structure of Marine Predator-Prey Interactions in the Columbia River Plume ....................16

Identified Priority Needs and Actions............................................................................................................................17

Priority Science Needs..............................................................................................................................................17

Priority Policy Needs.................................................................................................................................................20

Appendix A. Participant List..........................................................................................................................................23
vi

This page left intentionally blank 
1

Conservation and Ecology of Marine Forage Fishes—

Proceedings of a Research Symposium, September 2012

Edited by

Theresa Liedtke, U.S. Geological Survey;

Caroline Gibson, Northwest Straits Commission;

Dayv Lowry, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife; and

Duane Fagergren, Puget Sound Partnership

Introduction and Background 

Locally and globally, there is growing recognition of the critical roles that herring, smelt, sand 

lance, eulachon, and other forage fishes play in marine ecosystems. Scientific and resource management 

entities throughout the Salish Sea, agree that extensive information gaps exist, both in basic biological 

knowledge and parameters critical to fishery management. Communication and collaboration among 

researchers also is inadequate. 

Building on the interest and enthusiasm generated by recent forage fish workshops and symposia 

around the region, the 2012 Research Symposium on the Conservation and Ecology of Marine Forage 

Fishes was designed to elucidate practical recommendations for science and policy needs and actions, 

and spur further collaboration in support for the precautionary management of forage fish. This dynamic 

and productive event was a joint venture of the Northwest Straits Commission Forage Fish Program, 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), and The 

Puget Sound Partnership. 

The symposium was held on September 12–14, 2012, at the University of Washington, Friday 

Harbor Laboratories campus. Sixty scientists, graduate students, and fisheries policy experts convened;

showcasing ongoing research, conservation, and management efforts targeting forage fish from regional 

and national perspectives. The primary objectives of this event were to: (1) review current research and 

management related to marine forage fish species; and (2) identify priority science and policy needs and 

actions for Washington, British Columbia, and the entire West Coast. Given the diversity of knowledge, 

interests, and disciplines surrounding forage fish on both sides of the international border, the 

organizing committee made a concerted effort to contact many additional experts who, although unable 

to attend, provided valuable insights and ideas to the symposium structure and discussions. 

The value of the symposium format was highlighted in the closing remarks delivered by Joseph 

Gaydos, SeaDoc Society and Chair of the Puget Sound Science Panel. Dr. Gaydos’ presentation 

referenced the 2011 paper by Murray Rudd in the journal Conservation Biology, “How researchprioritization exercises affect conservation policy.” The paper points out that policy makers and funding 

agencies are more likely to gain a full understanding of issues when they are presented with research 

findings from an aligned research program. That is, compared to unaligned research strategies, where 

work is not based on identified research priorities. 
2

Symposium Agenda

The gathering launched with a dinner of local wild salmon and provided networking 

opportunities for invited speakers and participants, many of whom traveled considerable distances, and 

had not previously met each other or had not previously visited Friday Harbor Laboratories. The 

symposium began with 1 full day of invited science and policy presentations, with a keynote address by 

Tim Essington;(University of Washington) designed to inform in-depth discussions on the second day. 

A brief questionnaire was circulated on day 1 to help elucidate recommendations for science and policy 

needs and actions to be discussed on day 2.

Day 2 included two facilitated working groups, with subsequent review in plenary session of the 

identified priority science and policy needs and actions for Washington, British Columbia, and the West 

Coast. The agenda was crafted to address the research and management review on day 1 and to engage 

the participants in discussion of the priority science and policy needs and actions on day 2. A poster 

session was held at the end of day 1 to supplement oral presentations, and to foster additional 

information exchange in preparation for the discussions on day 2. The complete list of symposium 

participants is presented in appendix A. 

Day 1: Thursday September 13

• Welcome and introductions: Adam Summers, University of Washington/Friday Harbor 

Laboratories; Caroline Gibson, Northwest Straits Commission

• Symposium goals: Brie Van Cleve, facilitator (FB Van Cleve & Associates)

• Forage fish management in Washington: Dayv Lowry, Washington Department of Fish and 

Wildlife

• Forage fish management in British Columbia: Jennifer Boldt, Fisheries and Oceans Canada

• Herring and the ecological effects of infectious and parasitic diseases: Paul Hershberger, 

U.S. Geological Survey

• Toxic contaminants and effects on adult herring and eggs: James West, Washington 

Department of Fish and Wildlife

• Landscape and seasonal patterns of fishes and jellyfish in Puget Sound surface waters:

Casey Rice, NOAA/ Northwest Fisheries Science Center

• Temporal variation of pelagic forage fish around San Juan Island: Emily Runnells, 

University of Washington

• Seabird diets in the Salish Sea: Scott Pearson, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

• KEYNOTE: Advancing recommendations from the Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force:

Tim Essington, University of Washington

• An iconoclastic view of herring and forage fish in the Salish Sea—match and mismatch

between concern and ecology: Douglas Hay, Nearshore Research

• Native fish communities and habitat coupling: delivery of a nearshore energy subsidy by 

an offshore planktivore: Jason Stockwell, University of Vermont

• Regional marine food webs and modeling of energy flow: Issac Kaplan, NOAA /Northwest

Fisheries Science Center

• Pacific sand lance burrowing/physiology: Adam Summers, University of Washington/Friday 

Harbor Laboratories
3

• Predator-prey interactions and status of forage species in the California current: Julie 

Thayer, Farrallon Institute for Advanced Ecosystem Research

• Forage fishes and adaptive ecosystem-based management planning: Olav Ormseth, NOAA/

Alaska Fisheries Science Center

• Analyzing management strategies for marine forage fishes: Felipe Hurtado, University of 

Washington

• Federal–state policies and the Coastal Pelagic Species Fisheries Management Plan: Lorna 

Wargo, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

• The Pacific Forage Fish Campaign-Strengthening U.S. Federal policy: Steve Marx, Pew

Environment Group

• Poster session

Day 2: Friday September 14

• Key outcomes from day 1 and objectives for day 2: Brie Van Cleve (FB Van Cleve & 

Associates)

• Forage fish in Puget Sound: an anecdotal perspective: Duane Fagergren, Puget Sound 

Partnership and Northwest Straits Commission

• Puget Sound marine food web and forage fish monitoring workgroup: Ken Dzinbal, Puget 

Sound Partnership

• Framework for research and policy needs discussions: Brie Van Cleve (FB Van Cleve & 

Associates)

• Discussion groups:

o Science Needs: facilitated by Joseph Gaydos, SeaDoc Society

o Policy Needs: facilitated by Kit Rawson, Tulalip Tribes

• Summary of discussion groups, group consensus, and wrap up: Brie Van Cleve (FB Van 

Cleve & Associates)

Symposium Presentations

Each invited speaker on day 1 provided a presentation abstract, included here in chronological order of 

delivery. In addition, several participants presented posters and the abstracts for those are presented in 

alphabetical order, based on the first author.

Presentation Abstracts 

Forage Fish Management in Washington

Dayv Lowry, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

Forage fish are small, schooling fish that serve an integral role in marine food webs as 

consumers of plankton and primary consumers, and prey for other fish, birds, and marine mammals.

Forage fish species in Washington include Pacific herring, various smelt, Pacific sand lance, northern 

anchovy, and Pacific sardine.
4

Though exploitation of forage fishes for human consumption in Washington has occurred for 

centuries, modern fisheries management began in earnest in 1971 with the establishment of the Puget 

Sound Baitfish Project. Since this time, the Department of Fish and Wildlife has, to varying degrees,

studied the distribution, abundance, genetic variation, ecology, and fisheries exploitation of forage 

species, especially herring and surf smelt. In 1998, the Department developed a plan for the 

management of forage fish resources in Washington that was intended to guide resource management 

decisions, establish research and monitoring priorities, and shape fishing regulations in accordance with 

a precautionary approach to overall management. The plan was distinctive, at the time, in that it 

emphasized the ecological role of forage fishes and explicitly stated that harvest would be foregone as 

needed to ensure adequate forage fish were left to accomplish their ecological role.

Since the late 1990s, the Department has dedicated moderate resources to the research and 

management of forage fishes, though this trend has been changing since the mid-2000s. Commercial 

fisheries currently exist for herring, surf smelt, anchovy (largely inactive), and sardine (coastal waters 

outside 3 NM), and recreational fisheries exist for herring and surf smelt. Fisheries for eulachon, or 

Columbia River smelt, were progressively reduced, and ultimately closed entirely in 2010, in response 

to listing of this species as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act. With growing international 

recognition of the ecological importance of forage fish, and the consequences of their overexploitation, 

scrutiny of Washington’s management has increased in recent years.

The Department is currently part of a coordinated regional effort to re-evaluate forage fish 

management practices and research priorities. This effort also includes Tribal co-managers, the 

Northwest Straits Commission, the SeaDoc Society, the federal government (USGS and NOAA 

Fisheries), academic partners (University of Washington, Western Washington University), the 

Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and various community action and stakeholder groups. 

Leveraging this recent enthusiasm, numerous research projects have begun in Washington in the past 

few years that have the potential to guide forage fish management in the future.

Forage Fish Management in British Columbia, Canada

Jennifer Boldt1, Tom Therriault1, Jaclyn Cleary1, Jake Schweigert1, Linnea Flostrand1, Douglas Hay2, Lisa Mijacika1

1

Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2

Nearshore Research.

Important forage fish species in British Columbia (BC), Canada include Pacific herring (Clupea 

pallasi), Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax), eulachon (Thaleichthys pacificus), sand lance (Ammodytes 

hexapterus Pallas), surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus), and anchovies (Engraulis mordax). Many of 

these species have also comprised economically and/or socially (culturally) important fisheries in BC.

Within BC waters some stocks of these species are non-migratory, some are migratory, and others 

migrate across international boundaries. Where fisheries management plans exist, Fisheries and Oceans 

Canada (DFO) applies a precautionary approach. In general, this approach is about being cautious when 

scientific knowledge is uncertain, and not using the absence of adequate scientific information as a 

reason to postpone or fail to take action to avoid serious harm to fish stocks or their ecosystem. This 

widely accepted approach is an essential part of sustainable fisheries management. In addition to 

policies on incorporating the Precautionary Approach, the new national Sustainable Fisheries 

Framework in Canada contains policies for adopting an ecosystem based approach to fisheries 

management including: Managing Impacts of Fishing on Benthic Habitat, Communities and Species, 

and a policy on New Fisheries for Forage Species.
5

Herring and the Ecological Effects of Infectious and Parasitic Diseases

Paul Hershberger, U.S. Geological Survey

For unconfirmed reasons, forage fish populations periodically undergo large oscillations in 

population size and species assemblage shifts. These well-documented changes often resonate 

throughout multiple trophic levels; as such, an understanding of proximate and ultimate causes of forage 

fish population change is necessary to successfully manage codependent marine resources, including 

Pacific salmonids and marine mammals. Here, I present lines of evidence supporting the hypothesis that 

Pacific herring populations throughout the NE Pacific are impacted by diseases caused by endemic 

pathogens, including viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus (VHSV), erythrocytic necrosis virus (ENV) 

and Ichthyophonus. Examples include the decline and failed recovery of herring populations in Prince 

William Sound, Alaska, and the recent shifts in age structure among herring populations in Puget 

Sound, Washington. Ultimate drivers of these proximate disease impacts are being addressed using a 

well-controlled reductionistic approach, and predictive tools are being developed that will be capable of 

forecasting the potential for future disease impacts to herring populations.

Toxic Contaminants and Effects on Adult Herring and Eggs

James E. West, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

Sandra M. O’Neill, NOAA/Northwest Fisheries Science Center

Pacific herring are exposed to a wide range of toxic contaminants in Puget Sound, at levels that 

may affect their health and reproductive success, as well as pose a risk to the health of humans who 

consume them. Herring and other small, schooling, pelagic planktivorous fishes also play an important 

role in the trophic transfer of bioaccumulative toxic contaminants in Puget Sound, resulting in exposure 

to predators higher in the food chain (e.g., Pacific salmon, rockfishes, lingcod, piscivorous seabirds, and 

marine mammals). The nearshore benthic spawning behavior of Pacific herring also places their eggs 

and embryos at risk of exposure to contaminants, because input of many toxic contaminants in Puget 

Sound occurs at the land-sea interface. In this talk we review results from a long-term monitoring study 

of toxic contaminants in adult herring, and focus on spatial and temporal trends for three major 

contaminant groups—(1) polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs; (2) brominated flame retardants (or 

PBDEs); and (3) hydrocarbons, resulting from oil spills and burning fossil fuels (polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons, or PAHs). We discuss the health risks to this species from exposure to these 

contaminants, and a frame of reference for the safety of this species as seafood for humans. We also 

present results of a one-time survey on exposure of spawned herring embryos to environmental PAHs, 

representing five major spawning stocks in Puget Sound and the Southern Strait of Georgia.
6

Landscape and Seasonal Patterns of Fishes and Jellyfish in Puget Sound Surface Waters—Preliminary 

Results

Casey Rice1, Correigh Greene1, Linda Rhodes1, Brian Beckman1, Jeff Cordell2, Anne Baxter1, Jason Hall1, Josh Chamberlin1, Hans 

Daubenberger3

, Hiroo Imaki1, Scott Stelzner3, Kurt Fresh1

1

NOAA/Northwest Fisheries Science Center, 2

University of Washingto. 3

Port Gamble/S’Kallam Tribe. 4

Squaxin Tribe

Recent declines in pelagic fish species such as herring and alterations in coastal foodwebs have 

raised the question of how people affect the pelagic ecosystem. We are examining how natural habitat 

features and human alterations to shoreline habitats and their local catchments may influence patterns 

in species abundance and composition from lower to middle trophic levels by integrating landscape 

analysis into a broad surface trawling design sampling over 80 sites monthly across Puget Sound in 

2011.

Similar to data from 2003, we observed clear differences in the biomass composition among the 

subbasins of Puget Sound, with fish dominating in the northern areas, and jellyfish dominant in central, 

south, and Hood Canal. Strong spatial structure is also apparent in microbial activity and plankton 

community composition. Analysis to characterize spatial and temporal patterns in the biota and relate 

them to abiotic variables is ongoing.

Temporal Variation of Pelagic Forage Fish Around San Juan Island

Emily Runnells, University of Washington

I am testing the hypothesis that seabird feeding activity in Cattle Pass, San Juan Islands, 

Washington, has decreased in comparison to the mid-1990s, along with decreases in the abundance of 

small, pelagic fish. Data collection included land-based seabird surveys and multi-frequency acoustic 

surveys that were used to determine the distribution and abundance of forage fish. These seabird and 

forage fish surveys replicated the methods used by J. Zamon (unpublished) in the mid-1990s. To date, I 

have done a preliminary analysis of interdecadal variation. It appears that there is a significant decrease 

in seabird foraging activity between decades. The area integrated backscatter (a measure of forage fish 

abundance) shows a consistent trend between decades, throughout the summer season. There are yearly 

differences in both seabird foraging activity and forage fish abundance, showing similar variation, with 

some discrepancy. Analyzing the top 30m and top 10m of the water column separately, to test for 

changes in spatial distribution of forage fish, indicated that the upper water column was less variable 

between decades. These interesting patterns lead me to explain my next steps in analyzing the 

relationship between seabird foraging and forage fish abundance and distribution.
7

Seabird Diets in the Salish Sea and Northern California Current

Scott Pearson1, Michael Schrimpf2, Peter Hodum3, Tom Good4, Julia K. Parrish2, Jane Dolliver2

1Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2University of Washington. 3University of Puget Sound. 4NOAA/Northwest Fisheries Science Center

Seabird diet has been used as an indicator of fish populations, fishery recruitment, climate 

change and shorter-term climate events, and to understand food web relationships, especially in 

endangered ecosystems such as the Salish Sea. To identify information gaps and summarize what is 

known about seabird diet in the Salish Sea and northern California Current, we created a database of 

seabird literature that allows users to summarize data available for specific prey and predator taxa, time 

periods, and/or geographic regions. The database allows users to identify seabird-species specific diets 

and also identify the suite of seabird species that eat a given species of fish. For example, the studies in 

the database identify 12 seabird species consume Pacific herring (Clupea harengus pallasi). The 

distribution of diet studies was not uniform across time, with some seabird species having much more 

coverage than others. Several species of alcids had the longest continuous diet data, with periods of 

study extending 10 or more years in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

An alternative way to assess changes in seabird diet is to compare results from contemporary 

and historic studies. Our contemporary research on rhinoceros auklet (Cerorhinca monocerata) diet 

coupled with work conducted in the 1970s is an example from the database of how seabird diet can be 

used to assess ecosystem changes over time. In this study, we sampled auklet diet in the Salish Sea

(Protection Island), on the outer coast of Washington (Destruction Island), and at the confluence of both 

environments (Tatoosh Island). Over 5,729 fish samples (968 bill loads) were collected from auklets 

during three sampling trips per island per season (2006-2010). In the Salish Sea, Pacific sandlance 

(Ammodytes hexapterus) and to a lesser degree herring made up the majority of the diet, while the diet 

on the coast was more diverse. Despite differences in size of fish among islands, the average weight and 

energy (KJ/g) per bill load did not differ between the Salish Sea and the coast because birds 

compensated by returning with more fish per bill load.

When we put our results in an historic context, average bill load weight and diet composition has 

not changed between the 1970s and today in the Salish Sea. Our work addresses the need for seabird 

diet data on a particular species in specific regions, while also identifying which regions and species 

may require more attention in the future.
8

KEYNOTE: Challenges and Opportunities in the Conservation and Management of Forage Fishes: 

Advancing Recommendations from the Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force

Tim Essington, University of Washington

Small, schooling pelagic species often play critical roles in food webs as conduits of energy from 

lower trophic level species to upper trophic level species (e.g., salmon, rockfish, marine mammals, sea 

birds).

Managing fisheries that target these species—often for bait or reduction to fishmeal and fish 

oil—is made problematic by highly variable population dynamics and by the fact that these species are 

often easy to target and catch in large numbers even when population densities are low. Managing 

fisheries to protect their vital ecosystem services requires attention to localized depletion, identifying 

and protecting foraging opportunities for dependent predators, and developing robust indicators that can 

warn of ecological effects. The Lenfest Forage Fish Task Force recently completed its final report and 

recommendations regarding the management of forage fish fisheries that account for their unique life 

histories and ecological roles. One key recommendation was an operational precautionary approach that 

defined levels of knowledge about stock health and ecosystem effects and appropriate limit and target 

reference points that should apply for each level. Here I review those recommendations, comment on 

their application to U.S. and Canadian fisheries, and also review the options for economic valuation of 

forage species that account for their benefits to fisheries and non-market species.

An Iconoclastic View of Herring and Forage Fish in the Salish Sea—Match and Mismatch between 

Concern and Ecology

Doulas Hay, Nearshore Research

In general, concerns about forage fish species (FFS) in the Salish Sea (SS) are related to 

decreases in abundance or diminishing spatial distribution. More specific concerns are related to 

changes in age composition, especially recent reductions in the frequency of older, larger fish and 

changes in spawning time. Organizations, mainly NGOs, advocating progressive changes in policy in 

the marine environment have focused on curtailing fisheries as a solution to the apparent problems. 

Such action often may be warranted but not necessarily for all regions or all FFS in the SS. Further, the 

focus on fisheries has deflected attention away from habitat issues that jeopardize health and habitats 

used by FFS. Important FFS habitats may be at risk from industrial developments and mariculture in 

important herring spawning areas. The focus on fisheries as a problem can also undermine the general 

appreciation of climate change impacts on the biology and ecology of FFS in the SS.

Of all FFS in the SS we know most about herring. Herring spawn in shallow, coastal areas. 

Records of spawning locations, collected since the 1920s, indicate that repeated use of specific 

spawning locations varies. Some spawning locations are abandoned but a review of the distribution of 

roe-herring fishing areas shows no evidence of cessation (or serial depletion) of spawning attributable to 

fishing. However even simple overviews of the distribution of coastline industrialization show 

substantial activity in important spawning areas and the long-term consequences are uncertain. 

Protecting herring spawning habitat can be difficult for management agencies because spawning 

locations vary in time. Also, there is increasing evidence that spawning locations can vary annually as a 

function of temperature and perhaps other oceanographic phenomena. Demographic changes occurring 

through the North Pacific also may be important because older, larger herring tend to spawn earlier and 
9

may use different locations than younger herring spawning later. Compounding this complexity is a 

striking decrease in size-at-age of herring—a phenomenon that may be climate-related and perhaps 

cyclical over long periods. Recent (2000-2012) size- at-age patterns resemble that of the early 1950s. 

There also is evidence of recent fundamental changes in maturation biology with relative ovary size 

increasing.

Native Fish Communities and Habitat Coupling: Delivery of a Nearshore Energy Subsidy by an Offshore 

Planktivore

Jason Stockwell, University of Vermont, Rubenstein Ecosystem Science Laboratory

In ecosystems where native fish species have been greatly reduced or extirpated, ecological 

processes such as transport of energy and nutrients across habitats or ecosystems may be lost to the 

detriment of remaining native species. We hypothesized that fall spawning migrations of rehabilitated 

Lake Superior cisco (Coregonus artedi) provide a spatial resource subsidy from the offshore pelagic to 

the nearshore benthic community over winter, in the form of energy-rich cisco eggs, when alternate prey 

production is likely low. We tested this hypothesis using fish population demographics, diet and stable 

isotope analyses, and bioenergetics modeling. Our results suggest that cisco eggs represent 16% of lake 

whitefish (C. clupeaformis) annual consumptive demand on a biomass basis, but 35% on an energetic 

basis because of their high energy density (> 10 kJ·g wet-1

). Stable isotope analyses corroborated these 

results, and suggest other nearshore fish species also may rely on cisco eggs. Cisco eggs likely play an 

important role for post-spawn recovery and future reproductive output of whitefish. In the other Great 

Lakes, where cisco populations remain very low, the offshore-to-inshore ecological link present in Lake 

Superior has been replaced by non-native planktivorous species which spawn in spring, have smaller 

eggs, and shorter incubation periods. Our work suggests rehabilitation of native fishes may provide 

additional benefits beyond simple predator-prey considerations.

Potential Impacts of Depleting Forage Species in the California Current

Isaac Kaplan, NOAA/Northwest Fisheries Science Center

Harvests of lower-trophic level species may be in direct competition with forage needs of other 

species. Colleagues and I have applied two ecosystem models of the California Current to test the 

impacts on other parts of the ecosystem of harvesting euphausiids, forage fish, mackerel, and 

mesopelagic fish such as myctophids. We estimated the abundance that would lead to maximum 

sustainable yield for these four groups individually, but found that depleting forage groups to these 

levels can have both positive and negative effects on other species. The most common impacts were on 

predators of forage groups, some of which showed declines of >20% when forage groups were depleted 

to 40% of unfished levels, a level commonly believed to be sustainable for single species. Depletion of 

euphausiids and forage fish had the largest impact on other species. Though higher trophic level species 

such as groundfish are often managed on the basis of reference points that can reduce biomass to below 

half of unfished levels, this level of forage species removal is likely to impact the abundance of other 

fishery target species and other groups in the food web. These results are consistent with a related global 

study (Smith et al. 2011 Science 333:1147–1150) that considered five ecosystems and three alternate 

ecosystem modeling frameworks.
10

Pacific sand Lance Burrowing/Morphology

Adam P. Summers1, Jordan Balaban2, Nicholas Gidmark3, Joseph J. Bizzarro1

1University of Washington.Friday Harbor Laboratories

2University of Rhode Island. 3Brown University.

Sand lance are small forage fish that spend a substantial amount of time buried in the substrate.

We have investigated their preference for certain grain sizes, the kinematics of burrowing, and the 

forces needed to penetrate the substrate. Using small (30-50) schools of sand lance in tanks with a single 

size class of sediment we determined they can burrow in everything from small gravel to mud.

However, when presented with a choice between sediments of different sizes they preferred a coarse 

sand with grain size from 0.5-1 mm. The next size class larger was preferred over the next size class 

smaller and other size classes were barely tolerated if there was a choice. We used high speed video and 

x-ray videography to quantify the kinematics of burrowing. Sand lance usually contact the substrate at a 

steep angle and, holding their head still they drive the head and anterior third of their body into the 

substrate. Then the tail becomes motionless and the anterior of the body undulates to draw the rest of the 

fish under. Using a polymer molding compound we made epoxy replicas of the anterior third of several 

sand lance then clamped these models in a material testing system and drove them into packed 

and unpacked wet substrates. It requires significantly more force to penetrate packed substrates but 

preference experiments showed sand lance do not prefer the unpacked over the packed. We expect this 

is because they are making their substrate choice visually rather than by testing their burrowing ability.

Forage Fish Ecology and Management in the California Current with an Emphasis on Predator Needs

Julie Thayer, Farallon Institute for Advanced Ecosystem Research

Mid-trophic level forage species are an important component of marine food webs which 

directly support marine birds, mammals and fish of societal concern, but are generally under-studied in 

most marine ecosystems. In the California Current system (CCS), primary forage species include a 

variety of coastal pelagic fish (e.g., sardine, anchovy), juveniles of predatory fishes (e.g., age 0-1 

rockfish, hake), and invertebrates (e.g., squid, krill). Forage species management within the CCS falls 

under various jurisdictions including federal and state agencies, and tribes. The California Marine Life 

Management Act (MLMA) and the federal Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management 

and Sustainable Fisheries Acts require that ecological interactions and dependencies be incorporated 

into fishery management plans (FMPs) and regulatory decisions, but this has been infrequently 

implemented. U.S. management agencies are now grappling with development of ecosystem fisheries 

management plans (EFMP). I will provide an overview of forage fish ecology, importance and 

management in the CCS, with an emphasis on forage in relation to predator needs. The increased 

importance of forage species to commercial fisheries revenue and aquaculture increases the urgency of 

improving management and understanding the implications of removing forage species from the 

ecosystem.
11

Management and Monitoring of Forage Fishes in Alaska

Olav Ormseth and Stephani Zador, NOAA/Alaska Fisheries Science Center

In Alaska, the phrase “forage fishes” can mean several different things. As is the case elsewhere, 

forage fishes are generally small fishes that serve a critical ecosystem role as prey for larger fishes, 

seabirds, and marine mammals. But this group comprises many different species with a wide variety of 

biological characteristics, vulnerability to human impacts, and regulatory mechanisms. Forage fishes are 

often juvenile stages of species, such as walleye pollock, whose adult forms are the targets of major 

federal and state fisheries. Pacific herring is a key forage species that is targeted by commercial and 

subsistence fisheries in state waters. Federal management also recognizes a “forage fish” group of 

diverse taxa, from smelts to krill, for which all directed fishing is prohibited and retention and 

processing are strictly limited. Despite the variety of forage species, most of this group shares the 

central challenge of monitoring temporal and spatial trends in abundance. In Alaska, very little survey 

effort is directed towards forage fish assessment. We are currently exploring the use of different proxies 

for abundance including bycatch rates in hydroacoustic surveys, patterns of seabird productivity, trends 

in predator diet composition, and changes in mean size. We will present an overview of forage fishes 

and their management in Alaska, highlight research needs, and offer some suggestions for monitoring 

abundance.

Analyzing Management Strategies for Marine Forage Fishes

Felipe HurtadoFerro, University of Washington

Forage fish support some of the world’s largest fisheries, comprising around 37% of global 

marine fish catches, and are key components of marine food webs, converting energy from lower 

trophic levels and supporting larger fish, seabirds and marine mammals. Despite their ecological and 

economic importance, forage fish are also highly variable, being influenced by environmental and 

oceanic conditions, resulting in massive and unpredictable fluctuations in abundance. These factors 

present managers with multiple and conflicting objectives, multiple stakeholders and high levels of 

uncertainty. The management strategy evaluation (MSE) framework was developed as a response to 

these challenges. MSE involves assessing the consequences and effects of a range of management 

strategies, explicitly considering uncertainty, and presenting results in a way that clearly shows the 

trade-offs in performance across a range of management objectives. 

In this talk, I will present two examples of MSE for two contrasting sardine stocks: Pacific 

sardine and Japanese sardine. Pacific sardine is a healthy stock managed conservatively with relatively 

low exploitation rates, while the Japanese stock is currently at very low abundance levels and has been 

fished intensively. In both cases different management strategies are evaluated, with special attention 

given to strategies that incorporate environmental factors. 
12

Federal-State Policies and the Coastal Pelagic Species Fisheries Management Plan

Lorna Wargo, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

Forage fish management along the Washington coast is guided by both federal and state policies 

and regulations. The Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council), one of eight regional fishery 

councils in the United States, is responsible for setting fishery management policy and developing 

management measures for a suite of forage fish species in the Exclusive Economic Zone (3-200 miles) 

off the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California. The Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission 

establishes policies for fish resource utilization in state waters (0-3 miles); the Department of Fish and 

Wildlife is charged with implementing these policies through regulations. Two documents provide the 

framework for forage fish management in Washington: the Council’s Coastal Pelagics Fishery 

Management Plan, and the Fish and Wildlife Commission’s Forage Fish Management Plan, A plan for 

managing the forage fish resources and fisheries of Washington. Implementation of these comes with a 

host of challenges to understand the importance of forage fish in maintaining a healthy marine 

ecosystem, to set appropriate harvest levels and to address the potential for new fisheries to develop.

Pacific Forage Fish Campaign: Strengthening U.S. Federal Policy

Steve Marx, Pew Environment Group

The Pacific Fish Conservation Campaign is part of the Pew Environment Group’s national 

Forage Fish Conservation Initiative. The Pacific Campaign works to suspend the expansion of fisheries 

on forage stocks unless and until an ecosystem-based approach can be implemented that conserves the 

prey base for all marine life. Currently, the campaign is working within the Pacific Fishery Management 

Council process to prevent new fisheries from developing on unmanaged or unfished forage species 

such as saury, sandlance and lanternfish, until adequate science and management measures are in place 

to ensure an ecologically sustainable fishery. 

Under existing law and regulations, new fisheries on unmanaged forage species can develop in 

the absence of any science and/or regulation. The campaign is also working to ensure that the Pacific 

Council explicitly incorporates ecological considerations into the management of existing forage 

fisheries on species such as Pacific sardine, market squid, northern anchovy and mackerel. This means 

that fishery managers must identify the impacts of forage removals on the ecosystem and other fisheries, 

assess the dietary needs of predators in the ecosystem, and make sure that they are leaving enough in the 

water to account for those needs and to maintain the role that forage species serve as prey. While the 

campaign is currently engaged at the federal level, they are also working to enact similar precautionary 

forage policies in state waters. The ultimate goal of this campaign and Pew’s other national efforts are to 

help implement an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management; protecting forage species as the 

cornerstone of healthy and productive marine ecosystems is the first step.
13

Poster Abstracts

Juvenile Wild Chinook migrating and rearing in the San Juan Islands prefer herring but rely on sandlance

Russel Barsh, Gene Helfman, Donna Adams, Julia Loyd, Madrona Murphy, Dennis Rosenman, and C.J. Wilson

KWIAHT 

Juvenile wild Chinook from throughout the Salish Sea forage in the San Juan Islands from May 

to September, at 65-200 mm fork lengths. To determine the resource requirements of these fish and 

monitor their nutritional status, we have set a 120-foot seine in 2-3 fathoms of water every other week 

when salmon are present in two heavily utilized bays, and gut lavaged up to 50 wild fish/day. Data for 

nearly 2,000 fish lavaged in 2009-2012 suggest that juvenile herring are the preferred prey but are only 

bioavailable when they are less than one-third of the length of the salmon. Such small herring are rarely 

seen in the islands, most likely because of the historical decline of herring spawning in the islands.

When herring are not bioavailable, sandlance are most likely to be taken instead; sandlance are 

bioavailable up to 60% of the length of the salmon. Smelt comprise less than one percent of fish taken 

by juvenile Chinook. Crustaceans and terrestrials comprise most of the juvenile Chinook when herring 

or sandlance are absent or too large to handle. Juvenile Chinook and nesting seabirds near our Lopez 

Island and Waldron Island study sites may both compete for limited local herring stocks and default to 

consuming sandlance.

Studies of Eulachon Smelt in Oregon and Washington 

Phillip Dionne1, Erick Van Dyke2, Lorna Wargo1

1Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 

2Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

Since 2010 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and Oregon Department of 

Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) have collaborated on a three year project to monitor eulachon (Thaleichthys 

pacificus) by-catch in pink shrimp (Pandalus borealis) fisheries, and better document the abundance 

and distribution of eulachon in the Columbia River and document their spawning in Oregon and 

Washington rivers. Preliminary results from the first two years of this project to determine 

presence/absence of spawning found potential eulachon larvae in five of 16 rivers sampled outside of 

the Columbia basin. Larvae sampling in the Columbia River demonstrated a likely spawning window 

from November through May, and preliminary larval abundance estimates from the winter/spring of 

2011 indicate that approximately 590 billion eulachon eggs were spawned in the Columbia River and its 

tributaries. Now entering the third and final year of the study, efforts to monitor larvae density in the 

Columbia River will continue, but will be partnered with efforts by the NOAA Pt. Adams Research 

Station to collect pre-spawn adult eulachon in the lower estuary to assess sex ratio and fecundity.
14

Did an Oil Spill Contribute to the Decline of Cherry Point Herring?

Fred Felleman, WAVE Consulting

Maintaining abundant and diverse forage fish is crucial to the recovery of many avian and 

marine species of the Salish Sea. The Puget Sound Leadership Council included Pacific herring as one 

of 21 “Dash Board Indicators” of its recovery in U.S. waters. However, the actions needed to achieve 

those goals remain to be defined.

The genetically distinct Cherry Point herring stock has declined from 15,000 tons of spawning 

biomass in the 1970s, to less than 800 tons currently. The purported migratory nature of this stock has 

been used to assert that anthropogenic impacts from the construction and operation of three industrial 

facilities, and associated docks, ships and wastewater discharges along the spawning beds have had 

negligible impact on the stock. Uncertainty surrounding the cause of this decline has not resulted in 

research or recovery efforts despite the proposed construction of the Gateway Coal terminal. 

New information is presented on a major oil spill that occurred during a record high herring 

spawn (Bellingham Herald 6/8/72) the year prior to the stock’s decline. The chronic acoustic, visual and 

water quality impacts associated with the existing industrial facilities are also suggested to be 

contributors to the stock’ failure to recover. 

Intensive studies following the Exxon Valdez and Cosco Busan oil spills document the 

significant impacts of PAH exposure during early life stages. Spinal deformities are increasingly

prevalent from Cherry Point downstream of the NPDES discharges. These impacts are exacerbated by 

UV light, to which spring spawning stocks such as Cherry Point are particularly exposed.

Evidence for the Portfolio Effect in Pacific Herring in Puget Sound, Washington

Tessa B. Francis, University of Washington/ Puget Sound Institute

Effective management of Puget Sound forage fish requires an understanding of the natural and 

human drivers behind year-to-year fluctuations in population abundances. Current management 

strategies for Pacific herring in Puget Sound are based on the genetic differentiation between three 

separate stocks/stock complexes. However, additional characteristics may contribute to the diversity of 

the entire Puget Sound metapopulation. Here, we consider whether there is a portfolio effect in herring, 

where the entire Puget Sound herring stock is buffered against broad abundance fluctuations by the 

diversity of multiple populations. Using annual adult spawning biomass data collected by WDFW for 

each herring population (1973-2011), we found that abundance patterns varied among the populations 

and there was little regional coherence. For several populations, their maximum contribution to total 

Puget Sound herring biomass was up to 10 times their mean contribution. The variability of individual 

population spawning biomass was more than 3 times the variability of Puget Sound-wide biomass 

across the time series. We found many negative correlations between the time series of individual 

population biomass. Finally, we found little regional coherence, in that the abundances of populations 

within regions were not more coherent than populations across regions. These patterns demonstrate that 

population-level diversity not derived from genetic differentiation is associated with abundance patterns. 

These results indicate the need for conservative management strategies aimed at maintaining the 

resilience in Puget Sound herring, particularly in light of their key role in the marine food web.
15

Investigations of Early Life History of Surf Smelt and Pacific Sand Lance in Puget Sound: Some 

Preliminary Findings and Planned Future Activities

Theresa L. Liedtke, Dennis W. Rondorf, Collin D. Smith, and Renee Takesue

U.S. Geological Survey

Pacific sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus) and surf smelt (Hypomesus pretiosus) use the 

beaches of Puget Sound for spawning and egg incubation, but little is known of the movements or 

distribution of these fish beyond the spawning period. Considering that nearshore habitats (such as 

eelgrass) are often used as nursery and rearing grounds by other fish species, we investigated the use of 

nearshore areas by the juvenile life stages of these fish relative to areas with bare substrates. We also 

investigated the influence of the shoreline configuration: we compared juvenile forage fish use of open 

shorelines vs. embayments. Small embayments are valuable habitats for juvenile salmon and other fish 

species, and may serve this role for forage fish as well. Combining these two questions we selected 11 

study sites in Central Puget Sound that were either open shorelines or embayments, with eelgrass or 

bare substrate. Our study objectives included: (1) measure abundance of juvenile forage fish in each of 

the four habitat types, (2) describe the extent and characteristics of eelgrass beds at study sites, and (3) 

describe food habits of juvenile surf smelt and sand lance captured in eelgrass habitats. We completed 

330 beach seine hauls in May and June 2012, during both day and night conditions, and captured over 

2,500 surf smelt and 59,000 sand lance. The total catch was dominated by sand lance, which were 

captured infrequently, in very high numbers. For surf smelt, the highest percentage of fish were captured 

in embayments with bare substrates (38%), and the lowest percentages were captured in embayments 

with eelgrass (14%). For sand lance, almost all catches were in bare habitats, with less than 1% of 

catches in eelgrass. A slightly higher percentage of fish were captured in embayments (56%) compared 

to open shorelines (43%). Analyses of habitat preferences are ongoing and analyses of juvenile forage 

fish food habitats in eelgrass will be conducted during summer of 2013.

Quantitative Assessment of Surf Smelt and Pacific Sand Lance Spawn Deposition

Shannon Miller and Randy Hatch

Point No Point Treaty Council

Most investigations of intertidal forage fish reproduction have been qualitative, useful for 

documenting spatio-temporal spawning distributions. Quantitative methods for assessing trends in egg 

abundance are lacking, however. We began a pilot study at Indian Island Naval Magazine in October 

2011, to develop a standardized sampling protocol to establish annual indices of surf smelt (Hypomesus 

pretiosus) and Pacific sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus) spawning success. A stainless steel quadrate 

frame was used to remove 0.05 m2 substrate samples at random points in the +5 to +10 foot tidal 

elevation range. Samples were later placed in an inverted 1 L plastic cone and water pumped upwards at 

a rate of 3 gallons per minute (i.e., elutriation). Rinsing caused heavier materials (sand, pebbles) to 

circulate while lighter materials (eggs, shell, silt) were forced out of the funnel into a retention sieve. 

Validity of the elutriation process was tested by examining 30 seeded replicates. Elutriation recovered 

97 % of surf smelt eggs and 74 % of Pacific sand lance eggs. Catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) of both 

species averaged 390 eggs/sample over the 6-month sample period. Smelt CPUE peaked in November 

(2,000 eggs/sample) and sand lance CPUE peaked in December (600 eggs/sample). Coefficient of 

variation among subsamples was high (>2.0) in some cases, indicating a patchy distribution of spawn.

Sample design modifications are ongoing to provide more precise estimates of egg deposition.
16

Historic Sampling Effort and Nearshore Distribution of Pacific Sand Lance (Ammodytes hexapterus) in the 

Salish Sea, Washington

James Selleck (Wahsington Departmen of Fish and Wildlife), Caroline Gibson (Northwest Straits Commission), Suzanne Shull

(Washington State Department of Ecology/ Padilla Bay NERR, and Joseph Gaydos (SeaDoc Society)

Pacific sand lance are an important food web component in the Salish Sea. These energy-dense 

fish constitute important prey for a variety of salmonids, groundfish, marine mammals, and seabirds.

Sand lance have been well documented in nearshore surveys in Puget Sound since the 1970s, yet little 

life history or biological information is available outside of intertidal spawning habitat use. We 

conducted a retrospective analysis of nearshore sand lance distribution using historical data to elucidate 

basic biological parameters. Beach seine and tow net data were gathered from federal, state and county 

agencies, tribes, universities, private consulting businesses, and non-profit organizations. We compiled 

15,192 records collected between 1970 and 2009, from 1431 unique sites, representing 13% of Puget 

Sound’s shoreline. Sand lance were captured in 21% of the records, and during every month of the year.

Sites were separated into seven watershed basins. Maps were produced outlining sand lance presence 

and catch size by basin. Sand lance presence ranged from 58% to 95% by basin, and were present at 

30% of stream mouths sampled. The maximum number of fish captured per record increased between 

May and August. The northern basins comprised 87% of large captures, mostly during mid-summer. A 

subset of the data found fork length ranging from 1.7 cm to 19.0 cm, with 6.5% of measured fish greater 

than 12 cm. Extensive nearshore fish surveys of Puget Sound over the past 40 years demonstrate sand 

lance are ubiquitous throughout the region year round, and in some instances in great abundance.

Spatial and Temporal Structure of Marine Predator-Prey Interactions in the Columbia River Plume

J.E.Zamon; E.M. Phillips; L.H. Reinalda

NOAA/ Pt. Adams Research Station

During 2003-2009, May and June oceanographic surveys on the Oregon and Washington coasts 

(USA) revealed anomalously high concentrations of fish-eating birds near the mouth of the Columbia 

River. Further ship- and land-based investigation demonstrated associations between bird predators and 

the tidally-driven convergence fronts separating low-salinity (12-21), recent river discharge from 

higher-salinity (>21) coastal waters. Mixed-species predator aggregations include both surface-feeding 

and diving species (e.g. gulls, pelicans, alcids, shearwaters). Aggregations were evident and recurring at 

fine spatial and temporal scales of meters to kilometers and hours to days. Diet items from birds 

captured in these areas included planktivorous forage fishes such as northern anchovy (Engraulis 

mordax), smelt (Osmeridae), and herring (Clupeidae); as well as some juvenile salmon (Oncorhynchus 

spp.). Preliminary evidence from estuary hydroacoustic surveys shows fish schools primarily below the

pycnocline, suggesting salinity structure has a strong effect on spatial distribution of forage fishes. We 

hypothesize the tidal dynamics of the Columbia River discharge create predictable aggregations of 

forage fishes in time and space, and fish aggregations then attract upper trophic level predators to river 

plume habitat. We propose the tidal dynamics of river plumes may be a general structural mechanism 

affecting predator-prey interactions in locations where river discharge affects coastal habitat.
17

Identified Priority Needs and Actions

Day 2 of the symposium was designed to foster discussions among participants in order to 

develop priority science and policy needs and actions for forage fish in Washington and British 

Columbia. Although a variety of species and geographic regions were discussed on day 1 to provide 

background, the goal of the group discussions on day 2 was to focus on the forage fish species present 

in the Salish Sea, making the resultant priority needs and actions regionally relevant.

To meet this objective in the limited time available on day 2, participants were asked to submit 

written ideas of suggested research and policy needs and actions during the first day. Day 1 

presentations initiated hearty discussion among participants and resulted in numerous written 

suggestions. The written suggestions were compiled by symposium support staff, and used as a starting 

point for group discussions on day 2. Facilitators were pre-selected to host the science (Joseph Gaydos) 

and policy (Kit Rawson) working groups and participants were invited to contribute input to the group 

of their choice. Each working group began by projecting the summary of the written contributions from 

day 1. Then the group moved through the list, adding comments and merging similar comments into 

themes, to arrive at the consensus list. The facilitators and organizing committee made it clear to the 

participants that the list was intended to be a compilation of priority needs and actions, but the items

would not be ranked. All listed needs and actions held equal priority on the broad scale and the 

compiled lists spanned a variety of focal research and management topics. 

Following the individual working groups, all participants reconvened to hear summaries 

generated by the working groups. This session was designed to allow science group members to provide 

input into the policy list, and vice versa. Joseph Gaydos and Kit Rawson presented the summaries for 

their respective working groups and comments were incorporated into the lists.

Immediately following the symposium, the draft lists of science and policy needs and actions 

were circulated to all symposium participants for review. Comments and clarifications specific to 

information provided at the symposium were submitted to the organizing committee, and incorporated 

into the summaries presented below.

Priority Science Needs 

The Science Work Group generated a list of five priority needs to support the conservation and 

precautionary management of forage fish in the Salish Sea. These were categories for which work group 

participants stated that information was lacking, posing challenges for effective management. 

• Natural History Information 

The group discussed the overall lack of information on the natural history of forage fish 

in the Salish Sea. The life history of some species is better known than for others, for example 

we know more about herring than we do about sand lance, but additional natural history 

information for all species would be useful to inform managers and guide industrial (i.e., 

dredging) and restoration activities. The data gaps include a thorough understanding of stock 

structure, spatiotemporal distribution, behavior, and habitat requirements throughout all life 

stages. Participants suggested a synthesis of existing data, especially from field studies, an effort 

to generate natural history narratives for each species, and the construction of temporal 

conceptual models (including anecdotal information) as actions that could be taken to begin to 

meet this need.
18

A discussion on genetic stock delineation highlighted some recent findings and specific 

needs. A study of surf smelt genetics (WDFW and USGS) suggests there is a single stock of surf 

smelt in Puget Sound, but some additional analyses are needed to examine outlier stocks. Some 

anecdotal information suggests differences in sand lance life histories that might be influenced 

by stock structure, so the group put forward the need to assess sand lance genetics.

• Habitat Protection and Habitat Quality Information

There are significant knowledge gaps related to forage fish habitat requirements.

Managers cannot effectively protect or restore habitats critical for forage fish if species 

requirements are not known at all life stages. The group defined specific applications for habitat 

protection information, including informing Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA, managed by 

WDFW) and Section 404 (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) permitting decisions. Shoreline

spawning species of forage fish are vulnerable to habitat degradation due to human activity

impacts on the shoreline. One specific need that came from group discussion was definitive 

information on the impacts of shoreline armoring on forage fish that spawn in the intertidal zone.

Additional information needs included a better understanding of the temporal consistency of 

beach use by intertidal spawners (i.e., surf smelt and sand lance), the use of deep-water 

sandforms by sand lance, an effort to quantify the importance of specific habitat types, and the 

effects of habitat quality (such as toxic exposure and shading) on the early life history and 

recruitment of all forage fish species.

• Trophic Interaction Information

More information is needed on the role of forage fish in the marine food web, including 

the diet needs of forage fish and their predators. The group was specifically interested in 

comprehensive food web modeling (expanding current models and using new models) using the 

entire Salish Sea (versus modeling subbasins) to best account for heterogeneity in the system.

Inputs to these models include knowledge about species abundance and distribution, as well as 

consumption and metabolic efficiency data, which ties this need to other needs identified by the 

group. Ultimately, this approach should help to define the specific role of each forage fish 

species in the ecosystem and to quantify the forage fish biomass that is needed to support local 

predator species. Predators will consume forage fish regardless of any established fisheries 

quotas that are set, so managers need to define a predator reserve or predator buffer and build it 

into harvest control rules in order to maintain the health of the ecosystem. Input that would be 

useful to support this effort includes local, long-term datasets on the use of forage fish by 

predators, conducting isotope analysis of existing samples, evaluations of the food base for 

forage fish (plankton abundance), and modeling the potential impacts of forage fish bycatch in 

trawl fisheries in Washington and British Columbia. Using online data sharing was proposed as 

a procedure that could be developed or expanded to support these information needs.
19

• Consideration of All Stressors

The group recommended efforts to identify abundance-limiting stress or mortality factors 

throughout forage fish life histories. Although much of the historical information on forage fish 

in the Salish Sea is based in the nearshore environment, it is important to note that the majority 

of forage fish life histories are in the pelagic realm. Consideration of stressors should include 

both the nearshore and the pelagic environments, all life stages (eggs through spawning adults), 

and both lethal and sub-lethal effects, with a linkage to impacts at the population level.

Examples of stressors discussed by the group include pathogens, toxic contaminants (including 

endocrine disruptors), changing climate conditions, disturbance or loss of critical habitat, and 

commercial and recreational fisheries. Further effort is needed to identify potential stressors and 

evaluate their impacts. For example, what is the impact on fish that are intercepted but not 

landed in shrimp trawl fisheries? Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans is working to 

develop a bycatch and discard policy to address some of these stressors. Linkages between 

stressors also need to be investigated, for example the potential interactions between 

contaminants and infectious disease in forage fish.

Several species-specific research actions were identified by the group. One action was a 

multi-stage, iterative approach to mitigating disease impacts to forage fish populations, including 

surveys to detect disease and the development of tools to predict disease potential. Other 

identified actions include evaluation of nearshore toxics on larval development and spawning 

activity, using a paired study design to investigate anthropogenic factors influencing sand lance 

recruitment and distribution, and investigating the cause of decline in Cherry Point herring to 

guide recovery efforts.

• Monitoring

Monitoring needs discussed by the working group were diverse and provided support to 

the other identified priority science needs. The lack of a reliable, and stock-specific, abundance 

estimate is a large data gap for most forage fish species in the Salish Sea. It is difficult to assess 

whether forage fish populations are stable, growing, or declining without a baseline population 

estimate and a means of assessing abundance on a relevant time scale. Herring are the only 

forage fish species in Puget Sound that are regularly monitored (by WDFW), and the group 

recommended that future effort be more balanced across all forage fish species. To achieve this 

goal, an evaluation of monitoring mechanisms and indices of abundance is needed (e.g., net vs. 

acoustic surveys), with consideration to approaches that use egg and larval surveys. Additional 

effort also is recommended in fishery monitoring, especially non-commercial catch, in all of its 

forms, including recreational, tribal, and bycatch. Data are lacking on the timing and location of 

forage fish spawning and migration on the coasts of Washington and British Columbia, although 

a new effort to survey the Washington coastline was initiated by WDFW and tribal co-managers 

in September 2012. To enhance oil spill preparedness, the group recommends baseline surveys 

of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in known critical habitats, such as spawning 

beaches and eelgrass beds. Finally, the group noted that a systematic monitoring effort would 

improve our understanding of the regional marine ecology. All suggested monitoring efforts 

would benefit from improved coordination among State and Federal agencies and Tribes as well 

as non-profit entities, industry, and volunteer organizations (e.g., Marine Resource Committees).
20

Priority Policy Needs 

The Policy Work Group generated a list of eight priority needs to support the conservation and 

precautionary management of forage fish in the Salish Sea. These were categories for which work group 

participants recommended actions that could prove effective in improving management goals and 

outcomes. 

• Address All Threats During Restoration Planning and Implementation

This action emphasizes the need to base management strategies on, and implement 

existing policies for, the concurrent evaluation of all threats to forage fish. Specifically it calls 

for management through the “ecosystem lens” when plans are developed for protection and 

restoration of forage fish, incorporating threats such as habitat loss or degradation, climate 

change, and fishing pressure. Currently (2012), at least in Washington, there are significant gaps 

in how forage fish are managed because the harvest formula proposed in the 1998 Forage Fish 

Management Plan requires valid estimates of population abundance and harvest, both of which 

are lacking for most species. Additionally, the capacity for in-season management of these 

resources is lacking due to staffing and funding shortfalls. The working group recommended 

several actions, including taking a conservative approach to setting harvest guidelines and 

permitting of new fisheries and new gear types, using appropriately-sized marine protected areas

to ensure protection of forage fish throughout their life cycle, cleaning up polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCBs), and reducing the use of fossil fuels in an effort to reduce PAHs. In Canada,

there are several policies in place that address multiple threats to forage fish, but further progress 

is needed toward implementing them for all fisheries.

• Revise Management Framework to Address Ecosystem Role of Forage Fish Niche

It is widely recognized that forage fish abundance in a localized region can fluctuate 

broadly over a series of years in response to a combination of factors, including ocean 

conditions, recruitment success, predation pressure, fishery intensity, and habitat quantity and 

quality. As species often respond differently to these factors, it is important to consider the 

ecosystem role of the forage base in aggregate, rather than on a species-specific basis. The 

working group recognized that managing the abundance of, fishery pressure on, and protection 

of habitat for the multispecies “forage fish niche” requires information on population and food 

web dynamics that may not yet be available. However, the science working group recommended 

a focus on research on trophic interactions that could be applied to this management need. 
21

• Craft Messages To Create And Enhance Public Awareness 

Public awareness of forage fish, what they are and their important role in the ecosystem, 

is lacking and should be improved to support forage fish management. Because the definition of 

‘forage fish’ can be variable, one priority action would be to develop and distribute a clear 

definition of forage fish to the general public (especially in Washington and British Columbia). 

One approach might be to use compelling natural history narratives of the forage fish, linking 

them to the more charismatic species they support, such as salmon, orcas, and seabirds. Several 

small working groups could each prepare short narratives and combine them with some color 

images to create information pamphlets for distribution. The goal of this public awareness 

campaign would be a public that is supportive of forage fish conservation measures because they 

acknowledge the importance of these fish species. 

• Develop and Enforce Fisheries Rules That Support Sustainable Management 

More explicit mechanisms are needed to aid the integration of science into policy and 

management decisions. In cases where the need to use science to guide management is 

expressed, the actual mechanisms by which to execute this goal are not clear or consistently 

applied. One specific action identified by the working group applies to Washington, where they 

recommend licensing recreational harvest of surf smelt in Puget Sound (commercial harvest is 

currently licensed). A related need in Canada is for monitoring of both the commercial and 

recreational catches of surf smelt (see Priority Science Needs, Monitoring).

• Identify Opportunities To Protect Forage Fish Through Existing Mechanisms

A comprehensive review of existing mechanisms that could enhance protection of forage 

fish needs to be undertaken. For example, protection opportunities may exist using the critical 

habitat designation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), or the designation of essential fish 

habitat under the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA). Under the MSA the Pacific Fisheries 

Management Council (and other regional fisheries councils) can designate forage fish as 

“essential fish habitat” for other species (16 U.S.C. 1853(a)(7); MSA 303 (a)(7)). Another 

mechanism might be the consideration of prey items for fish protected under the ESA in Section 

7 Consultation documents. For example, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers conducts dredging 

that entrains sand lance, but no constraints are used to guide the dredging since sand lance have 

no ESA protection. If links are made to ESA-listed species that consume sand lance (e.g., 

salmon), then restrictions could be put in place to avoid or minimize disturbance to sand lance.
22

• Align Washington State’s ‘No Net Loss’ Policy With Permitting Authority Under Law

Washington State Administration Code defines known forage fish (herring, surf smelt, 

and sand lance) spawning habitat as Saltwater Habitats of Special Concern (WAC 220-110-250)

and establishes a “no net loss” provision for the protection of these areas from shoreline 

development, including armoring. Exceptions to this provision are allowed, however, in the case 

of single-family residences and under certain commercial situations. Additionally, the system by 

which development permits are issued varies regionally and rarely involves post-construction 

monitoring to evaluate long-term ecological effects of the construction. Numerous unauthorized 

shoreline structures have been noted in Puget Sound, and permitted structures may not be built 

to specifications for a variety of reasons. This priority need requires close coordination between 

the management authorities within WDFW’s habitat and enforcement divisions and revisions to 

policies and initiatives governing shoreline development, including the Habitat Conservation 

Plan (HCP) and Critical Area Ordinances.

• Develop Specific Language on Forage Fish Under Existing WA-BC Cooperative 

Agreements

Forage fish protection efforts could be aided by inserting specific language on their role 

and requirements into existing transboundary agreements. Specific agreements discussed by the 

working group include the Pacific Coast Collaborative, the West Coast Governor’s Alliance, the 

Pacific Salmon Commission, and the National Ocean Council.

• Establish a Transboundary Forage Fish Task Force and Working Group

The group recommended establishing a transboundary forage fish task force and a 

working group. One example for the task force, although not exactly the model suggested, is the 

International Pacific Halibut and Salmon Commissions. A Forage Fish Working Group should 

be established and affiliated with the Puget Sound Partnership. The task force could conduct a 

comprehensive assessment of historical and current forage fish science and management, 

incorporating the findings of Governor Gregoire’s Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification 

(Fall 2012). The task force could then develop specific ecosystem-based objectives for forage 

fish management that recognize the key role of forage fish in the complex marine food web.

Finally, the task force could develop a plan for implementing the priority policy needs and 

actions identified here to achieve these management objectives. The Forage Fish Working Group 

could then actively pursue implementation of these recommendations through the auspices of the 

Puget Sound Partnership. There was wide support for this policy action, among both the policy 

and the science working groups. The trans-boundary biennial research conference, the Salish Sea 

Ecosystem Conference, provides a constructive venue for scientist and managers to consider 

such a strategy for cooperation across the international border. Sustained long-term funding for 

the task force was identified as a need.
23

Appendix A. Participant List

PARTICIPANT LIST

2012 Friday Harbor Laboratories Symposium

Conservation and Ecology of Marine Forage Fishes 

September 12-14, 2012

Last Name

First 

Name Affiliation Email

Barsh Russel KWIAHT RLBarsh@gmail.com

Beamer Eric Skagit River System Cooperative ebeamer@skagitcoop.org

Boldt Jennifer Fisheries and Oceans Canada Jennifer.Boldt@dfo-mpo.gc.ca

Chapman Alan Lummi Nation alanc@lummi-nsn.gov

Cheng Henry WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Yuk.cheng@dfw.wa.gov

Davis * Shannon FRIENDS of the San Juans shannon@sanjuans.org

Dionne Phillip WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Phillip.dionne@dfw.wa.gov

Donnelly Robert US Army Corps of Engineers Robert.F.Donnelly@usace.army.mil

Dublanica Keith Recreation and Conservation Office keith.dublanica@rco.wa.gov

Dye Paul The Nature Conservancy pdye@tnc.org

Dzinbal Ken Puget Sound Partnership ken.dzinbal@psp.wa.gov

English Collin Freelance consultant - communication collin.english@gmail.com

Essington Tim University of Washington essing@u.washington.edu

Fagergren Duane Puget Sound Partnership duane.fagergren@psp.wa.gov 

Felleman Fred WAVE Consulting felleman@comcast.net

Francis Tessa UW/ Puget Sound Institute tessa@uw.edu

Fredrickson Ivy Ocean Conservancy ifredrickson@oceanconservancy.org

Gaydos Joseph SeaDoc Society jkgaydos@ucdavis.edu 

Gibson* Caroline Northwest Straits Commission gibson@nwstraits.org 

Gleason Nancy US Army Corps of Engineers nancy.c.gleason@usace.army.mil

Hay Doug Nearshore Research hay.doug@shaw.ca

Hershberger Paul U.S. Geological Survey phershberger@usgs.gov 

Hood* Andrea Northwest Straits Commission hood@nwstraits.org

Hunt George University of Washington geohunt2@uw.edu

Hurtado Felipe University of Washington fhurtado@u.washington.edu

Kaplan Isaac NOAA/ NW Fisheries Science Center isaac.kaplan@noaa.gov

Koch Kyle Skagit Fisheries Enhancement Group kyle@skagitfisheries.org

Krueger Kirk WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Kirk.Krueger@dfw.wa.gov

Liedtke Theresa U.S. Geological Survey tliedtke@usgs.gov 

Lindquist Adam WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Adam.Lindquist@dfw.wa.gov

Lloyd David San Juan Marine Resources Committee lloyd@islandtransit.org

Lowry Dayv WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Dayv.Lowry@dfw.wa.gov

Marx Steve Pew Environment Group smarx@pewtrusts.org

Miller Shannon Point No Point Treaty Council smiller@pnptc.org

Moran Patrick U.S. Geological Survey pwmoran@usgs.gov

Ormseth Olav NOAA/ Alaska Fisheries Science Center olav.ormseth@noaa.gov

Pearson Scott WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Scott.Pearson@dfw.wa.gov

Penttila Dan Salish Sea Biological depenttila@fidalgo.net

Pokorny Tami Jefferson Co. Water Resources tpokorny@co.jefferson.wa.us

Rabourn Greg King Co. Dept. of Natural Res. & Parks greg.rabourn@kingcounty.gov

Rawson Kit Tulalip Tribes krawson@tulaliptribes-nsn.gov
24

Rice Casey NOAA/ NW Fisheries Science Center casimir.rice@noaa.gov

Robinson Erik Pew Environment Group erobinson@pewtrusts.org

Runnells Emily University of Washington esrunnells@gmail.com

Schlenger Paul Confluence Environmental Company paul.schlenger@confenv.com

Selleck James WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife James.selleck@earthlink.net 

Small Doris WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife doris.small@dfw.wa.gov

Stedman Bruce Stedman & Associates brucestedman1@gmail.com

Stick Kurt WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife stickkcs@dfw.wa.gov 

Stockwell Jason University of Vermont jdstockw@uvm.edu

Summers Adam University of Washington/ Friday Harbor Labs fishguy@u.washington.edu

Thayer Julie Farallon Institute for Adv Ecosystem Research jthayer@faralloninstitute.org

Van Cleve* Brie FB Van Cleve & Associates brie.van.cleve@gmail.com

Waldbillig Chris WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Chris.Waldbillig@dfw.wa.gov

Wargo Lorna WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife lorna.wargo@dfw.wa.gov

West Jim WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife james.west@dfw.wa.gov

Whitman Tina FRIENDS of the San Juans tina@sanjuans.org

Zamon Jeanette NOAA/ Pt. Adams Research Station jen.zamon@noaa.gov

*Staff support
Publishing support provided by the U.S. Geological Survey

Publishing Network, Tacoma Publishing Service Center

For more information concerning the research in this report, contact the 

Director, Western Fisheries Research Center

U.S. Geological Survey

6505 NE 65th Street

Seattle, WA 98115

http://wfrc.usgs.gov/
Liedtke and others— Conservation and Ecology of Marine Forage Fishes—Proceedings of a Research Symposium, September 2012—Open-File Report 2013–1035