Session B2- Building a fishway for Lake Sturgeon: Successful testing of a prototype upstream fishway on the Menomine River in Northern Wisconsin

Historically, lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) were abundant in Lake Michigan with free and unobstructed access to the feeding and spawning areas within its many tributaries. Construction and operation of hydroelectric dams has impeded this access. One method for re-establishing this lost connection is to create an artificial pathway such as a fish passage facility. To help answer some basic questions, such as will sturgeon use a fishway, we constructed a prototype fish passage structure below a hydroelectric dam on the Menominee River in northern Wisconsin. This hydroelectric facility is located near Amberg, Wisconsin and owned by We Energies. The structure was designed with a ramp to a 1.07 meters per second (mps). The structure was equipped with a Passive Integrated Transponder tag (PIT tag) reader antenna and underwater video cameras equipped with infrared lights. All monitoring equipment were installed and activated before the start of the 2009 spring spawning season 9mid-April) and removed following the 2010 autumn migration (mid-October). PIT tag records indicated that 86 tagged lake surgeon used the passage structure in 2009 and 112 in 2010, with many sturgeon going through the structure multiple times. Video data verified these results and also indicated that these sturgeon moved through the structure rather quickly (mean = 3 sec in camera view). Extrapolated to the whole sturgeon population, nearly 20% of the spawning population went through the prototype fishway in 2009 and 24% in 2010. For both years of the study, larger sturgeon were observed during the spring spawning season versus the remainder of the year, 25.4 centimeters longer on average. In 2010, the structure was fitted with a V-trap (45.7 cm gap width with 0.46 mps constant water velocity) to test whether these fish can be trapped in an elevator hopper. Those results indicate both small and large sturgeon (as small as 49.5 cm and as large as 142.2cm, respectively) will pass through a 45.7 cm wide V-trap opening without hesitation. Video and PIT tag results indicated that sturgeon can be successfully attracted to and passed through a prototype upstream fish passage facilities currently planned for lake sturgeon in the Midwest

A Comparison of Standard-Dose and High-Dose Epinephrine in Cardiac Arrest outside the Hospital

BACKGROUND. Experimental and uncontrolled clinical evidence suggests that intravenous epinephrine in doses higher than currently recommended may improve outcome after cardiac arrest. We conducted a prospective, multicenter study comparing standard-dose epinephrine with high-dose epinephrine in the management of cardiac arrest outside the hospital. METHODS. Adult patients were enrolled in the study if they remained in ventricular fibrillation, or if they had asystole or electromechanical dissociation, at the time the first drug was to be administered to treat the cardiac arrest. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 0.02 mg of epinephrine per kilogram of body weight (standard-dose group, 632 patients) or 0.2 mg per kilogram (high-dose group, 648 patients), both given intravenously. RESULTS. In the standard-dose group 190 patients (30 percent) had a return of spontaneous circulation, as compared with 217 patients (33 percent) in the high-dose group; 136 patients (22 percent) in the standard-dose group and 145 patients (22 percent) in the high-dose group survived to be admitted to the hospital. Twenty-six patients (4 percent) in the standard-dose group and 31 (5 percent) in the high-dose group survived to discharge from the hospital. Ninety-two percent of the patients discharged in the standard-dose group and 94 percent in the high-dose group were conscious at the time of hospital discharge. None of the differences in outcome between the groups were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS. In this study, we were unable to demonstrate any difference in the overall rate of return of spontaneous circulation, survival to hospital admission, survival to hospital discharge, or neurologic outcome between patients treated with a standard dose of epinephrine and those treated with a high dose. (N Engl J Med 1992;327: 1051–5.

Prosedur kedaruratan: emergency prosedures/ Jastremski

xxii, 520 hal.: ill.; 23 c

Prosedur kedaruratan: emergency prosedures/ Jastremski

xxii, 520 hal.: ill.; 23 c

Prosedur kedaruratan: emergency prosedures/ Jastremski

xxii, 520 hal.: ill.; 23 c

Prosedur kedaruratan: emergency prosedures/ Jastremski

xxii, 520 hal.: ill.; 23 c

Prosedur kedaruratan: emergency prosedures/ Jastremski

xxii, 520 hal.: ill.; 23 c

Prosedur kedaruratan = emergency procedures

xxii+520hlm.;24c

Analysis of the Priorities, Obstacles, and Opportunities for Implementing U.S. State Wildlife Action Plans

Introduction and Study Background This report explores the development and implementation of the Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies, also known as State Wildlife Action Plans (plans), for the nine Northeastern states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. As part of a study funded by the National Council for Science and the Environment’s Wildlife Habitat Policy Research Program, eight universities conducted research on development and implementation of all U.S. plans. During 2007–2008, a team of nine interdisciplinary graduate students at the University of Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment investigated plan development and implementation in nine states in the Northeast United States. This report includes the team’s findings of state wildlife conservation activities, emerging conservation priorities, new conservation approaches and tools, and examples of current projects that demonstrate promising directions for accelerating habitat conservation. What are the State Wildlife Action Plans? In 2001, Congress required states and territories to develop a CWCS in order to continue qualifying for federal State Wildlife Grant funds. Each plan was required to include the following eight common elements: (1) Distribution and abundance of wildlife species, (2) Locations and condition of key habitats and community types, (3) Wildlife and habitat threats, (4) Conservation actions to address these threats, (5) Plans for monitoring species, habitats and the effectiveness of conservation actions, (6) Plans for review and adaptive management of the strategy, (7) Plans to coordinate strategy development, implementation and review with federal, state, local agencies and Indian tribes, and (8) Opportunities for broad public participation in plan development and implementation. While some states approached plan development as an exercise in articulating broad goals and objectives for protecting state species and habitats, others developed more specific action plans with prioritized short-term and long-term actions.Master of ScienceNatural Resources and EnvironmentUniversity of Michiganhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/21/Regional_ExecSum_Final.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/20/Regional piece_final.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/19/Vermont.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/18/Rhode Island.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/17/Pennsylvania.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/16/New York.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/15/New Jersey.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/14/New Hampshire.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/13/Massachusetts.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/12/Maine.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/11/Connecticut.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/10/EMichael_TransbFreshwater_final.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/9/AppC.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/8/AppB.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/7/AppA.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/6/Visser_Federal%20Collaboration-1.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/5/Lewis%20and%20Theriot_LIP%20final%20report.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/4/Levy.GIS.all.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/3/Lauren_s%20Drilldown%20Final.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/2/Ashley_Partnerships.dochttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/58214/1/Aldridge_Jastremski_DD.pd