144 



Fishes — Our Liiiiif; Resoiiives 



For further information: 



James E. Johnson 



Natiiinal Biological Service 



Arkansas Cooperative Research 



Unit 



Department of Biological Sciences 



University of Arkansas 



Fayetteville.AR 72701 



Carolina (21). New Mexico (20). and Georgia 

 (20; Figure). Regionally, the Southwest has the 

 highest mean number of fish species listed per 

 state (22.5). closely followed by the Southeast 

 (19.3); the northeastern states have the lowest 

 mean number of native fish species in trouble 

 (3.7). Nearly half (48%) of the southwestern 

 native fishes are jeopardized, followed by fishes 

 of the Northwest (19%). the Southeast (10%). 

 the Midwest (6.4%). the central states (5.9%). 

 and the Northeast (4.3%; Warren and Buit 

 1994). 



The AFS will likely update its listing of 

 native fishes in peril toward the end of this 

 decade, thus providing us with more than 20 

 years of information on the status of these fish- 

 es, a short time in the overall life of a species 

 but a good data base upon which to evaluate the 

 environmental health of our streams and lakes. 

 If the trend over the last decade continues, we 

 can expect a further decline in the richness of 

 our native fishes. In addition, as aquatic habitat 

 deterioration becomes more extensive, we can 

 expect to see an increase in the listing of wide- 

 spread fishes. 



References 



Carlson, C.A., and R.T. Muth. 1989. The Colorado River: 

 lifeline of the American Southwest. Pages 220-2.^9 in 

 D. P. Dodge, ed. Proceedings of the International Large 



Rivers Symposium. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and 

 .Aquatic Sciences. Special Puhl. 106. 



Deacon, J.E., G. Kobetich. J.D. Williams, S. Contreras. et 

 al. 1979. Fishes of North America endangered, threat- 

 ened, or of special concern. 1979. Fisheries 4(2):30-44. 



John.son, J.E. 1987. Protected fishes of the United States 

 and Canada. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD. 

 42 pp. 



Lee, D.S., C.R. Gilbert, C.H. Hocutt, RE. Jenkins, D.E. 

 McAllister, and J. R. Staufter, Jr 1980. Atlas of North 

 American freshwater fishes. North Carolina State 

 Museum of Natural History. 2-'i4 pp. (Reissued 1981 with 

 appendix; 867 pp.) 



Miller. R.R. 1972. Threatened freshwater fishes of the 

 United States. Transactions of the American Fisheries 

 .Society 1()1(2):239- 2.'i2. 



Moyle. PB,. and J.J. Cech, Jr 1988. Fishes: an introduction 

 to ichthyology. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 559 

 pp. 



Robison. H.W. 1986. Zoogeographic implications of the 

 Mississippi River basin. Pages 267-285 in C.H. Hocutt 

 and E.O. Wiley, eds. The zoogeography of North 

 American freshwater fishes. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 

 New York. 



Stames, W.C, and D.A. Etnier. 1986. Drainage evolution 

 and fish biogeography of the Tennessee and Cumheriand 

 rivers drainage realm. Pages 325-361 in C.H. Hocutt and 

 E.O. Wiley, eds. The zoogeography of North American 

 freshwater fishes. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 



Warren, M.L., and B.M. Burr. 1994. Status of freshwater 

 fishes of the United States: overview of an impenled 

 fauna. Fisheries 19(1):6-18. 



Williams, J.E., J.E. Johnson, DA. Hendrickson, S. 

 Contreras-Balderas, J.D. Williams, M. Navarro- 

 Mendoza, D.E. McAllister, and J.E. Deacon. 1989. 

 Fishes of North America endangered, threatened, or of 

 special concern: 1989. Fisheries 14{6):2-20. 



Southeastern 



Freshwater 



Fishes 



by 



Stephen J. Walsh 



Noel M. Burkhead 



James D. Williams 



National Biological Service 



North America has the richest fauna of tem- 

 perate freshwater fishes in the world, with 

 about 800 native species in the waters of 

 Canada and the United States. The center of this 

 diversity is in the southeastern United States, 

 where as many as 500 species may exist (62% 

 of the continental fauna north of Mexico). Many 

 coastal marine species also enter fresh waters of 

 the Southeast, and at least 34 foreign fish 

 species are established in the region. 



Although freshwater fishes of the United 

 States are better studied than any fish fauna of 

 comparable scope in the world (Lee et al. 1980; 

 Hocutt and Wiley 1986; Matthews and Heins 

 1987; Page and Burr 1991 ; Mayden 1992). large 

 gaps exist in scientific knowledge about the 

 biology and ecology of most species. New 

 species are still being discovered, and the tax- 

 onomy of other species is being refined. 



Seriously declining populations of freshwa- 

 ter fishes in the United States concern the sci- 

 entific community (Deacon et al. 1979; 

 Williams et al. 1989; Moyle and Leidy 1992; 

 Warren and Burr 1994). This article briefly 

 summarizes the current conservation status of 

 southeastern freshwater fishes; the Southeast is 

 emphasized because of its important fish biodi- 

 versity and to focus attention on the growing 



Pnncipal causes of declining fish resources in the 

 Southeast are due to habitat perturbations, such as loss of 

 forested stream cover, mining activities, and impound- 

 ments, as at this site in northern Georgia. 



problem of adverse human impacts on the 

 region's aquatic habitats (Mount 1986; 

 Burkhead and Jenkins 1991; Etnier and Stames 

 1991; Warren and Burr 1994). 



Hydrologic Regions 



The southeastern United States as defined 

 here is delimited on the north and west by the 

 Ohio and Mississippi rivers. The following 

 hydrologic regions (Fig. 1 ) are defined on the 

 basis of common geophysical characteristics 

 and similar fish faunas of the drainages within 



