7994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

restoration within the Basin. Species and habitat specific management and monitoring protocols must be coordinated, implemented, and integrated within all geographic areas of BCT occurrence within the Basin to assure a viable basin-wide recovery. Consistent with the above mentioned management, supplemented species conservation agree- ments (CA) and strategies (CS) must be developed. These CA/CS's should be developed by state(s} to address BCT management within their geographic area, as well as coordinated and agreed upon between States that share common sub-basins within the Bonneville Basin. As shown with this assessment, the activities and factors which have caused the decline of BCT populations and habitat continue to occur, some showing no sign of abatement. As human population growth increases within the Basin, more demands will be placed on water, timber, range, riparian, and other natural resources. The cumulative impacts of habitat degradation and species harvest and hybridization will continue to reduce the distribution and abundance of BCT, and could force many distinct, and geographically isolated populations of this sub-species into extinction. Principle management com- ponents and specific guidance based on the findings within this assessment can be categorized into three groups: A} protection, B) enhancement, and C) restoration. A) PROTECTION Agencies priorities must be focused on protecting existing populations and occupied habitats of the BCT. It must be incumbent on the management agencies, (i.e. Forest Service, BLM, and States) to provide responsible land and water stewardship and management accountability if these populations and their individual (or geographic area) genetic integrity is to be protected. Protection includes all forms of aquatic fauna and flora associated with these aquatic ecosystems, including invertebrates, amphibians, and other freshwater fish. Protection implies elimination of or reductions in all detrimental influences on habitats and populations. It is also implicit that the management agencies gives preferential management to the subspecies across its range when conflicting activities place the BCT at risk. 1. Genetic purity of BCT populations must be ascertained and monitored to assure contin- ued genetic integrity of specific basin-wide populations. Genetic validation should include meristics, electrophoretic and mDNA assessment. This will provide a more thorough understanding of population relationships with geographic isolation patterns, since some data included in this assessment are based on meristics only. Until more information is known about subspecies genetic relationship within the basin, genetic integrity of existing populations should be maintained, i.e. stocking of the sub-species outside of the major sub-basin of occurrence should not be considered. 2. A statewide and/or geographic area-wide assessment of state hatchery and stocking practices and protocols will benefit protection of the BCT. Since the late 1800's, fish hatcheries and stockings of non-native and exotic fish have contributed to massive hybridization of indigenous BCT populations. The introduction of non-native species has contributed to partial and/or total displacement and loss of BCT populations throughout the Bonneville Basin. In recent years, cultured non-native trout have contrib- uted not only to this "genetic pollution. but also have increased disease risk, (i. e. whirling disease), increased competition and displacement, masked the problems associated with habitat destruction and loss, and marked overharvest. A state-lead cooperative interagency assessment of hatchery and stocking programs would insure that non- native trouts and hatchery programs do not impact nor occur in waters within sub- basins presently occupied by the BCT, or in waters where restoration activities are planned. Such an assessment will increase the efficiency of the State to provide pro- 53