exceeds the supply, fish are often sold as smoked
sturgeon.
Shovelnose sturgeon are also harvested in late
fall and early winter for both meat and the highly
valued roe (Coker 1930). Moos (1978) reported that
shovelnose sturgeon eggs are uniformly dark by the
first of January and change little through the winter.
Some of the best caviar is produced from fish taken
at this time because the eggs are uniform in size and
color, firm, relatively easy to process. and of high
quality and taste before fat is incorporated into the
eggs in spring during the final egg maturation pro-
cess (Moos 1978). The general decline in prices of
roe from north to south (Table 2) reflects proximity
to market and quality of eggs. Southern states enjoy
the advantage of having a longer ice-free period on
the rivers, allowing commercial operators the op-
portunity to harvest sturgeon later in fall and earlier
in spring, when the roe is best for producing quality
caviar.
this species, is a continuing problem to the long-
term health of the species, especially as damming
and fragmentation may be affecting replacement,
reproduction, and gene flow.
In this survey, 12 states indicated that shovelnose
sturgeon populations have declined in the last 50
years, one state reported it to have become extinct,
and 11 states did not have information necessary to
make an assessment of population trends for that
period. Six states considered shovelnose sturgeon
populations to be stable since 1990, three states in-
dicated that the species is now considered extirpat-
ed within their state, and 15 states did not have suffi-
cient data to make trend analyses on this species.
Three states, Wyoming, West Virginia, and New
Mexico, are developing plans to restock shovelnose
sturgeon into waters that they once inhabited.
Hybridization of the shovelnose sturgeon with
the pallid sturgeon is an emerging concern among
sturgeon fishery managers. The possible introgres-
sion of genes from the more common shovelnose is
viewed as a threat to the rare pallid sturgeon (Carl-
Current status and outlook son et al. 1985, Keenlyne et al. 1994). Molecular
technologies have been unable to differentiate
The shovelnose sturgeon is the widest-ranging among shovelnose species and their hybrids
freshwater sturgeon in North America. There is lit- (Phelps & Allendorf 1983). Species like the shov-
tle question that its range and many populations elnose sturgeon that likely evolved with polyploidy
have been reduced as a result of human actions, (Blacklidge & Bidwell 1993) are difficult to study
either through overharvest early in the 20th century through normal genetic testing procedures. Imposi-
or through modification of riverine habitats by tion of recent introgressive hybridization may con-
dams and river-training structures (Coker 1930, tribute to the present state of confusion about integ-
Barnickol & Starrett 1951, Carlander 1954, Modde rity of species and will continue to remain a prob-
& Schmulbach 1977). A comparison of the historic lem for scientists and administrators who attempt
range (Lee et al. 1980) to the present range (Figure to manage for shovelnose species in the future.
- indicates that the species is now absent from the The welfare of the shovelnose sturgeon may have
Rio Grande River and from upstream reaches of future implications to our large rivers in the central
several large western rivers where movement has United States. Becker (1983) lists the shovelnose
been blocked by dams and stream flow has been al- sturgeon as a host for glochidia of the commercially
tered. valuable yellow sand-shellLampsilis teres, pimple-
In the questionnaire developed for this study, 19 back Quadrula pustulosa, and hickory-nutObova-
states responded that habitat alteration is a concern ria olivaria pearly mussels. Shovelnose sturgeon al-
in regard to the welfare of the shovelnose sturgeon, so are the only known host for the parasitic larvae of
six mentioned pollution as a concern, one men- the hickory-nut mussel (Coker 1930).
tioned overharvest, one mentioned hybridization,
and three expressed no issues of concern. Flow al-
teration and habitat fragmentation, as a result of
damming of many of the rivers within the range of