Laserfiche WebLink
<br />:t,', <br /> <br /> <br />THREATENED & ENDANGERED FISHES <br /> <br /> <br />Table 1. Fish species being held at Dexter NFH, New Mexico, as of July 1,1982, <br /> <br />I.'/(. <br /> <br />Spedes <br /> <br />! I" I '/~ ; Family Catostomidae <br />,)0: Razorback sucker <br />, Family Cyprinidae <br />Ii \ . u. .' Colorado squawfish, <br />.... '.<r'! Bony tail .' <br />~~ '-. .J;.",r'~i:_; Humpback chub <br />, Rounqtail chub. <br />!, . Gila chub.2 <br />" .iii~! I Sonora chub. <br />. w',I .~.:: Rio Grande chub. <br />L" I.i!.. Chihuahua chub (2 populations)l <br />';;;,].,':1; 1.!jL Yaqui chub <br />f..,:.... , Woundfin <br />.,.., . Bea~tiful ~hiner <br />!l' .. .'}, Family Cyprin6dontidae <br />" ;, ';." ( Comanche Springs pupfish <br />,.. Leon Springs pupfish <br />V' ','i"/ Desert pupfish <br />: '\' .... Family Poeciliidae <br />. ," i h, Gila topminnow <br />Big Bend gambusia . <br /> <br />IE - Endangered <br />T .... Threatened j;- ,; I <br />p. ~ Proposed for listing in Federal Register <br />C.... Candidate for future listing <br />2Editors Note: Not as yet recognized by the Committee on Names of Fishes, American Fisheries Society. <br />lOne from the Mimbres River, New Mexico, and one from the Rio Piedras Verde, Chihuahua, Mexico. <br />.Held temporarily for hybridization studies only. <br /> <br />!) -; .,i <br /> <br />,~?_~., --H'~:~<;-~:_ t,; I. <br />t.:'~':;;t~ 1;;'illn'::1 <br /> <br />, !., <br />-J' , <br /> <br />l i ~ } ~ .' .: ~ ~ i <br /> <br />fish in captivity far exceeded their numbers in the <br />wild, but still no fish were re-stocked. <br />This apprehension was first overcome in 1980, <br />when 35,000 Yaqui chub (Gila purpurea) were <br />stocked on private property (San Bernardino Ranch) <br />in southeastern Arizona. In the following year <br />(1981), the Arizona Department of Game and <br />Fish (AG&F) signed a Memorandum of Under- <br />standing (MOU) with the FWS to reintroduce <br />razorback suckers (Xyrauchen texanus) into the <br />Gila River and its tributaries, in lieu of listing the <br />species under the ESA. Under that MOU, the <br />FWS agreed not to propose razorback sucker for <br />listing until success of the restocking effort could <br />be determined, estimated conservatively at 10 <br />years. By 1985, more than 6 million fry and 296,000 <br />'I fingerling razorback suckers had been stocked in <br />Arizona waters. With reintroduction activities un- <br />der way in Arizona, a degree of confidence and <br />mutual trust began to develop among several of <br />the involved agencies towards reintroducing native <br />'~sh species. <br />h(Th~, next significant step in the reintroduction <br /> <br /> <br />. Sdentilic nlme <br /> <br />Federal 1.I.USI <br /> <br />Xyrauchen texanus <br /> <br /> <br />C <br /> <br />Ptychocheillls lucius <br />Gila elegans <br />Gila cypha <br />Gila robusta <br />Gila imermedia <br />Gila ditaenia <br />Gila pandora <br />Gila nigrescens <br />Gila purpurea <br />PJagopterlls argemissimus <br />NOlropis formosus <br /> <br />E <br />E <br />E <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />T <br />E <br />E <br />T <br /> <br />Cyprinodon elegans <br />Cyprinodon bovinlls <br />Cyprinodon macularius <br /> <br />E <br />E <br />P <br /> <br />Poeciliopsis occidemalis <br />Gambllsia gaigei <br /> <br />E <br />E <br /> <br /> <br />program was another MOU signed by the USDA <br />Forest Service (FS), AG&F, and the FWS, to re- <br />stock the endangered Gila topminnow (Poeciliop- <br />sis occidentlllis) into its historic range on Forest <br />Service lands in Arizona. Although several conces- <br />sions to circumvent the ESA were necessary (i.e., <br />no critical habitat designation and no curtailment <br />of existing land use practices in the re-inlr9duc~ion <br />areas), in order to get this MOU signed, the <br />precedent for re-introduction of listed species was <br />established. In June, 1982, more than 70 isolated <br />aquatic habitats in Arizona were stocked with Gila <br />topminnows, representing the first phase of a I" , <br />program that could result in down-listing the <br />species to threatened status by 1987 and complete <br />de-listing by 1989. These dates are probably op- <br />timistic, but the precedent this action sets engen- <br />ders optimistic predictions. It should be noted that <br />the Gila topminnow re-introduction effort may <br />have been the most intensive action ever attempted <br />for the recovery of an endangered species, and <br />that more than 100 separate re-introductions have <br />now taken place. <br /> <br />