Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.. ~ . t. <br /> <br />. . <br /> <br />that all populations appear to be declining, thus their capacity to serve as <br />donor populations may be compromised. <br /> <br />4. Recommendation number 4 should refer to the FWS policy on captive <br />propagation (cited on page 4) and its stipulations about the evaluation of <br />facilities utilized for captive propagation (or for housing refuge populations). <br /> <br />5. Recommendation number 5 on pages 6 and 7 should refer to the "Final <br />Revised Genetics Management Plan" previously published for big river fishes <br />in the upper basin with regard to paired matings (Fish and Wildlife Service <br />1999). <br /> <br />6. The plan states that "establishing a refuge or a captive propagation program <br />for humpback chub could result in reduced numbers ofrecruits or adults in the <br />wild, reducing genetic variability" and later that young humpback chub are <br />"presumably... lost to the mainstem Colorado River." This appears <br />contradictory - explain why these "lost" humpback chub should be used for <br />translocation as opposed to a refuge population, if that is the case. <br /> <br />7. Recommendation 3 discussed the need for translocations. Translocations can <br />have genetics consequences. A component of the plan should be to evaluate <br />populations in relation to translocations, should provide specific <br />recommendations on numbers of fish to be translocated, and in later <br />supplemental translocations, and should discuss what genetic monitoring <br />should occur in translocated populations. <br /> <br />8. The plan should incorporate a means of monitoring genetics of wild <br />populations, and the development of performance standards (genetic standards <br />of wild fish, for use in monitoring genetics of populations, refuges or <br />translocations). <br /> <br />9. The plan should seriously consider other causes of the declines of humpback <br />chub populations, and provide a more thorough review of the threats to these <br />populations. <br /> <br />10. We have also reviewed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pinetop Fishery <br />Resources Office comments on the draft plan, and feel that we share the same <br />concerns. We incorporate those comments here by reference. <br />