8129 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The NfWG took a creative approach to develop its own low-cost, alternative rearing facilities (Mueller 1995). Narrow coves along the lake's shoreline were physically blocked with nets or earthen barriers which provided rearing sites. Some seasonal, ephemeral ponds were also used. Non-native fish were removed, providing predator-free nursery areas where razorback suckers could be stocked and reared. In 1990,90 old adult razorback suckers were captured from the reservoir and stocked into an isolated backwater prior to spawning. They did successfully spawn, and the young survived and grew at the remarkable rate of 35-40 cm their first year. However, only 150 offspring were produced, a rate not nearly adequate for the intended goal. In conjunction with the spawning attempt, researchers were developing methods of monitoring spawning success. It was discovered that larval suckers were phototactic and could be captured by the thousands (Mueller 1993). This discovery presented a unique opportunity where we could use naturally spawned larvae as a source offish for our rearing ponds. We no longer had to capture and stock spawning adults. Rather than limiting the genetic variability to a few captive spawners, we could utilize the genetic variability of the entire reservoir population by simply collecting naturally-spawned larvae throughout the entire 3-month spawning season. A volunteer program was started in 1994 to collect naturally-spawned sucker larvae. Equipment is provided by government agencies and volunteers go out at night and collect larvae. Lights are hung in the water to attract the 10 mm larvae which are dip netted and taken to the hatchery where they are fed and grown out to a larger size for stocking. In 1994, over 11,000 larvae were collected and that number has doubled each year. This past season over 107,000 fish larvae were collected which have produced over 60,000 juvenile razorback suckers. While we have developed a method of collecting adequate numbers of larval fish, overall production continues to be restricted by available rearing space. The goal is to rear suckers to a length of30 cm before releasing them back into the reservoir. This growth can be reached in one year by using warm backwater habitats and low stocking rates. Under hatchery conditions we have a tendency to stock at higher numbers which retards growth. It often takes hatchery fish 2 or 3 years to reach an adequate size compared to only I year under more natural conditions. The program has adopted less conventional culturing approaches to increase production. Today the NFWG has cooperative agreements with municipal golf courses in three differe~t cities where we use their ponds as grow-out facilities. fish are stocked at numbers (500/ha.) low enough to avoid the need for feeding, while providing rapid growth, and producing fish at low costs. This expansion has been a tremendous success in not only producing additional fish, but also in drawing attention to restoration efforts. The program is being widely embraced by the public, advertised by the golf courses, and has been incorporated into some local high school curriculums. As of last year, nearly 6,000 juvenile razorback suckers had been reintroduced back into Lake Mohave. This number will dramatically increase during the next couple of years as hatchery fish become available. Research indicates that approximately 50% of the fish are surviving (Marsh 1997). for the first time in 3 decades, young adults are now commonly being captured with old adults. The ultimate goal is to establish a young adult population of 50,000 suckers. The Bureau of Reclamation and fish and Wildlife Service are presently negotiating an agreement to provide the necessary resources to insure that goal is achieved. DISCUSSION There have been some successful restoration projects within the Colorado River basin, however, they have been generally limited to those species inhabiting springs, small tributaries, and headwater habitats. Stream renovation is a common management practice in smaller, more confined habitats where restoration can be accomplished by removing the threat ofhybridization by means of natural barriers and eradication of non-natives, or by isolation (Rinne and Turner 1991). However, we have not been as successful in larger, more complex river ecosystems.