Black redhorse and silver…

Black redhorse and silver shiner:
Line 209: fish ladders are a horrible solution to barriers. They never pass all individuals of a species, and can select for different behavioural, physiological, or morphological traits of individuals that pass versus those that don't pass. If there's a barrier, then remove the barrier - that eliminates all the harms of a barrier (nutrient flow, water warming, algal growth, etc).
Line 246-7: why investigate the impacts? They will either occur, or not. If you found there were no negative impacts, I cannot believe that would change any management strategy, so why waste the effort in assessing the impacts? The invasive species are already on the landscape and you're not getting rid of them where they exist, so species will have to adapt to deal with it. By maintaining variation in behaviour, morphological, physiological, and life history - the four trait categories - you will help ensure the raw material is there for natural selection and thus adaptation.
Line 248-9: Which recreational activities? If you found an effect, would you, for instance, restrict people from swimming at certain times of the year in a specific area? If there is no possible legislative outcome where you would restrict people's activities, then do not waste time listing this as a concern you could feasibly address.
Line 278: "encourage"? You mean this would be voluntary? That's stupid. This is one of the few things you can both control and can reduce mortality very fast. Incidental harvest should already be known - how are bait harvesters not already audited to see what other species they accidentally catch? Make it the LAW that if they catch more than one individual, they must cease activities and move some distance away, live-release these species, and immediately report it. This is something you can actually control so exercise your authority here.