8127 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

A systems approach such as outlined by Phenicie and Lyons (1973) should be used to effectively establish priorities for the research and management of threatened and endangered species. This type of systematic step-down approach provides a mechanism for making the best use of the manpower and budget constraints that face all conservation agencies. Earlier I stated that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has officially listed 172 species as endangered and 11 species as threatened in the United States. In addition, nearly 2,000 other species are being reviewed as candidates for listing. Therefore, establishing realistic research and management priorites by spe- cies will be imperative since the knowledge, time, politics, and available funds required to save all threatened and endangered species will not be adequate. It will also require effective cooperation and communication among the recovery teams, state agencies, and federal agencies that are re- sponsible for endangered species. Pister (1976) summarized the future of wildlife management by rewriting leopold1s prediction as follows: IIUnless and until the common task of teaching the public how to modify economic activities for conservation pur- poses is accomplished, whatever else we might do in .the management of fish and wildlife resources is in the long run irrelevant.1I '. Potential of Threatened and Endan ered S eciesforFisher Mana ement. Behnke and Zarn 1976 pointed out that the idea of promoting angling for a rare species may appear contradictory to the goal of increasing its abundance. However, they also stated that certain subspecies of trout have .not become rare through overfishingand that, if they are re-established in waters within their native range, and reproduce naturally, they may provide unique, quality fisheries at almost no expense. Although some trout popu~ lations such as cutthroat trout (Salmo c1arki) may not show any apparent morphological differences, these populations (i.e., subspecies) may contain the genetic diversity that controls physiological and behavioral character- istics with a significant potential for management (Behnke, 1972). Depend- ing on the species, some special regulations may be necessary to sustain the populations. Miller (1963) believed that the Colorado squawfish could become eagerly sought by sportsmen, because the average size of the squawfish is larger than most trout and, if the philosopy of fishing for fun rather than harvest were encouraged, this native minnow could provide many hours of angling~ He cited an example of a university professor who found a greater challenge in catching small darters and sculpins on artificial flies than in catching trout. He further emphasized that the Europeans eagerly seek carp (Cyprinus carpio) and other native species that are harvested for food or returned to the water. last fall, at a Resources for the Future Forum in Albuquerque, Ne~'J rljexico, Robert J. Behnke supported the contention of Hiller (l963) ,,,hen he pointed out that one way to save a threatened or endangered species would be to develop a sport fishery for it that generated economy. He also believ- . ed that anglers might seek the opportunity to catch and release .Co10rado. squawfish if this species were given proper publicity as a unique species in the biological heritage of the United States. In the future, agencies may have to manage all species that possess some 281