3505

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 3505
• Author: Rinne, J., et al., ed. 1986.
• Title: American Fisheries Society,
• USFW Year: Role o
• USFW - Doc Type: \
• Copyright Material: YES

280

FISH CULTURE IN FISHERIES MANAGEMENT

areas extended from the river-lake interface to
the city of Wadsworth, 30 miles up stream. This
area is not now accessible for spawning because
of dam construction. In addition, during drought
and ensuing low-flow years, cui-uis cannot traverse
tile large delta that be~omes a barrier because of
the gradual drop in lake level. An additional
barrier occurs 2.98 miles up stream at the Marble
Bluff Dam and Fishway. The fishway is used by
cui-uis, but passage around the dam is not presently
possible. Further, suitability of the river above
the dam is marginal for natural propagation be-
cause of poor water quality and minimal spawning
substrate.

Program Effectiveness

A gill-netting program was conducted at Pyr-
amid Lake from 1956 to 1958 by the Nevada
Department of Fish and Game (Johnson 1958).
A similar program was carried out between 1975
and 1977 by a private consulting firm (Sigler and
Kennedy 1978). Results were as follows during
the two respective periods:

1954- Nov. 1975-
Cui-ui catch statistics 1958 Dec. 1977
Number of net sets 133 373
Number of cui-ui 307 415
Number of cui-ui
per net 2.31 1.11
Percent of total 4.40 1.28

The decrease in the cui-ui component of the total
catch (Sigler and Kennedy 1978) reinforces the
concern that the cui-ui may have declined in
numbers during this 20-year period. Although
netting techniques may have differed between
studies, catch-per-unit-effort was reduced by half.
Impact of the cui-ui hatchery on recovery of
the species may never be known. Dramatic prog-
ress of the hatchery propagation program has
occurred. as evidenced by the enormous success
of the 1982 operation. Development of rearing
techniques is the predominant reason for success
of this program. Techniques that have been de-
veloped and refined came only from intimate
, knowledge gained by hatchery personnel involved
in observations of the fish and the operating
system. Mastery of the art of cui-ui rearing comes
from many inputs, too subtle to define and ob-
tainable only by gaining "hands-on" experience..
Success in terms of benefit to the resource is more
tenuous, but the hatchery program does insure a

steady recruitment of healthy larval fish into ;Pyr-
amid Lake. Future research shouh;l include, (1)
methods for rearing large numbers of cui-ui to
fingerling size, (2) evaluation of survival of planted
cui-uis, and (3) monitoring the cui-ui population
for age-composition changes. j'

; ~,~., -i'; ~

Culturing an Arizona Native . Trout "
. 'It . 'i .
In the early 196Os, personnel of the AG&F
Department's Fisheries Branch recognized the
then undescribed Apache trout (Salmo apache)
as a unique salmonid that was declining in relative
abundance and occurrence (U .S. Dept. of In,terior
1983). In 1963j a total of 82 Apache trout were
collected from Ord Creek on the headwaters of
the White River, Apache County, Arizona. They
were transferred to the Department's Sterling
Springs Hatchery, located on the Coconino Na-
tional Forest on the headwaters of Oak Creek.
Spring flow is 31.1 ft3/min, with an average tem-
perature of 510F. Seasonal temperature fluctua-
tions are never more than 2.0oF. This initial brood
stock and subsequent generations served as the
gene pool for the Apache trout rearing program
in 1974. .... . '
With enactment of the ESA, the Apache trout
was listed as an endangered species. Because of
misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the
nature of the protective status afforded' an' en-
dangered species, the Apache trout ~earing pro-
gram became jeopardized. Local press coverage
claimed that many of Arizona's trout waters would
be closed to angling because they had been stocked
with Apache trout. I~ was not long afterward when
all Apache trout in capt;vi~y mysteriously disap-
peared. In 1975, the Apache trout was down-
listed to threatened status, and 118 individuals
were collected from Soldier Creek, Apache!Cciunty,
Arizona, on the headwaters of the Black River.
Subsequent offspring from these fisl\'constitutes
the brood stock for the present rearing program.

Culture Results

Standard fish-culture procedures were used' in
rearing Apache trout (Leitritz and Lewis 1980).
Eighteen years of intensive culture data indicate
that Apache trout may not spawn anQually. Two-
year-old male spawners have good milt production,
but production is greatly reduced in 3- and 4-year- .
. olds, and yield is approximately 1 ml pe{stripping.
. Two-year-old females produce few eggs, and older
'I ,,~
females may not produce eggseverysea59
';,;.'-~,':W0t~ -

1 ; , ~

:;',,-"'-