Laserfiche WebLink
<br />,<I <br />rl <br />:1 <br />(t <br />r.:.I.. <br />r <br />r <br /> <br />I <br />II <br />II <br />JI <br />;1 <br />tl <br />!I...-- <br />J <br /> <br />":1 <br />\1 <br /> <br />~,~ <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />,I <br />'I <br />LI <br />,I <br />I <br /> <br />2. Telemetry Studies <br /> <br />The movement and behavior of razorback and flannelmouth suckers were studied using telemetry <br />equipment. The objective was to determine where resident fish were spawning and examine post-stocking <br />related stress. <br /> <br />Resident Fish Tests <br /> <br />Twenty resident (each) razorback sucker and flannelmouth sucker were captured and implanted with radio <br />transmitters at either Big Bend State Park, Nevada, or Park Moabi, California. Fish were implanted with <br />transmitters in hopes they would lead us to spawning sites. Eight boat and three helicopter surveys searched <br />for the fish between Davis Dam and the upper portion of Lake Havasu. Unfortunately, we soon lost contact <br />with the fish. We believe the reason contact was lost stemmed from the equipments limited range and depth. <br />Either the fish moved outside the study area or had moved to a depth (>4 m) where the transmitters could not <br />be detected. <br />Eighteen-month radio (40 MHZ) transmitters with self-contained antennae were selected because of the <br />long-term duration of the study. We believed this transmitter type would provide information over two <br />spawning seasons. Lost contact of the fish is perplexing. Even with mortality, signals should have been <br />detected unless fish moved to depths >4 m, which would dampen signal transmission. The transmitters we <br />used had internal antenna that unfortunately produce a signal that is supposedly 25% weaker than transmitters <br />with external antennae. The internal antenna was selected since it did not have to tail out of an abdominal <br />wound. Fish implanted with external antennae are more prone to abdominal infections and mortality. We <br />suspect poor signal performance and possibly fish moving toward deeper habitats limited detection. <br /> <br />The Importance of Physiology and Behavior in Survival <br /> <br />The use of standard hatchery techniques in the production and stocking of endangered or economically <br />important fishery stocks has drawn considerable attention lately (Brown and Day, 2002). Survival related <br />issues have persisted in the reintroduction of native fish in the Colorado River for over two decades (Minckley <br />and Deacon, 1991; Mueller and Marsh, 2002). <br />Past efforts to stock razorback suckers have been plagued by predation and what appears to be poor <br />conditioning that results in chronic fatigue which may lead to mortality (Marsh and Brooks, 1989; Burdick and <br />Bonar, 1997; Mueller and Foster, 1999). Several researchers have questioned the manner in which hatchery <br />fish are raised and stocked but few studies have examined these issues (Marsh and Brooks, 1989; Burdick and <br />Bonar, 1996; Mueller and Foster, 1999). <br />We encountered further supporting evidence. Four juvenile razorback suckers were captured downstream <br />of Davis Dam that were originally stocked in Lake Mohave. The only way those fish could have reached their <br />collections site was to have traveled through Davis Dam and its power plant (i.e., successful turbine passage). <br />The likelihood of 25-30 cm fish successfully surviving passage through turbines has been shown to be <br />remarkably small (<.01) (Nibling and Liston, 1992). For us to encounter that many suggests substantial <br />numbers of juvenile suckers were entrained and the vast majority killed. This may partially explain the <br />relatively low survival rates (<12%) being experienced in Lake Mohave (Marsh oral communication). <br />We tested the post-stocking dispersal of razorback suckers, feeling that downstream drift could be a <br />symptom of chronic stress, especially when fish are being released in flowing habitats. Hatchery protocols that <br />have worked effectively for recreational species appear to be far less effective for some native fishes. <br /> <br />20 <br />