Looking Forward

The Future of Mussels in the Cannon

Of 297 native freshwater Mussels in North America, 213 are listed as endangered or threatened (Williams et. al, 1993). Reasons for extinction include habitat destruction from dams, channel modification, siltation, and introduction of non-native species.

Mussels in the Cannon River have demonstrated considerable resilience through the age of the pearl rush which decimated populations. They also demonstrate an ability to survive in water of increasing turbidity due to erosion. However, their ability to survive will continue to be tested as erosion continues. It is possible however; that recent changes in construction regulations designed to prevent erosion will improve the water quality for the mussels.

Mussels in the Cannon River may soon have to compete with the exotic species, the Zebra Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha). Introduced to the Great Lakes from Eastern Europe, this species is highly competitive and has been known to attach to other mussel species to keep them from feeding. Boaters in and around the Great Lakes have inadvertently assisted this species’ infiltration of the area by transporting mussel larvae in ballast water etc. While our study was being conducted, Zebra Mussels were found in the nearby St. Croix River. This discovery indicates that the Mussels may become part of the rest of Minnesota’s waterways soon.

Although the outlook for mussels in the Cannon River may appear bleak, residents of the watershed have begun to take a greater interest in the water quality of the river. Thanks to the Cannon River Watershed Partnership, people are becoming more aware of the issues affecting the river today. Through further education, more people will learn the importance of mussels as indicator species of the overall health of the river. This heightened awareness could ultimately preserve the mussels in the Cannon River.


Alexander, G.R., J. R. Ryckman. 1986. Effect of an abnormal discharge of sediment from the Lansing Club
impoundment on the trout population in the Pigeon River, Otsego and Cheboygan counties, Michigan, Michigan Department of Natural Resources Fisheries Division. Fisheries technical report 86-8.

Baily, R. C. 1989. Habitat selection by a freshwater mussel: an experimental test. Malacologia. 31(1): 205-210.

Cummings K.S., C.A. Mayer. Field Guide to Freshwater Mussels of the Midwest. Illinois Natural History Survey- Champaign: Manual 5, 1992.

Downing, J.A., W. L. Downing. 1992. Spatial aggregation, precision, and power in surveys of freshwater mussel populations. Canadian Journal of Fish and Aquatic

Freshwater Mussels of the Upper Mississippi. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources: Madison, Wisconsin: 1985.

Graf, D. L. 1997. Distribution of unionoid (bivalvia) faunas in Minnesota, USA. The Nautilus, 110(2): 45-57.

Kat, P.W. 1982. Effects of Population Density and Substratum type on growth and migration of ellitptio complanata (bivalvia :unionidae) Malacological Review 15: 119-127.

Marking, L. L., T. D. Bills. 1979. Acute effects of silt and sand sedimentation on freshwater mussels. UMRCC Symposium on Upper Mississippi River Bivalve Mollusks. 204-211.

Robbins, Chris 1996, Cannon River Watershed Plan. Cannon River Watershed Partnership. Faribault MN.

Sparks, Ruth. The Illinois pearl rush. The Nature of Illinois. 20-24.

Stern, Edward M. An Illustrated Key to the Freshwater Mussels (Bivalvia: Unionacea) of Wisconsin. Reports of Museum of Natural History: University of Wisconsin- Stevens Point. 20: 1990.

Williams, J. D., M. L. Warren, Jr., K. S. Cummings, J. L. Harris, R. J. Neves. 1993. Conservation status of freshwater mussels of the United States and Canada. Fisheries. 18(9): 6-22